I've requested clarification from the ISC. See attached. Stace
On 22/08/2009 17:52, Rao Shoaib wrote: > Sebastien Roy wrote: >> On Fri, 2009-08-21 at 23:51 +0100, Ceri Davies wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 02:43:19PM -0700, Rao Shoaib wrote: >>> >>>> Jim, >>>> >>>> I have been told that we can ask ISC to maintain backward compatibility >>>> for documented interfaces. So we would like to change the classification >>>> of all the documented interfaces to Committed. >>>> >>> Have ISC agreed to do this? If not, I feel that the change is somewhat >>> premature. >>> >> The most important part isn't what ISC agrees to do, but what the >> project team is willing to guarantee to consumers of the interface. If >> these are Committed interfaces, then the project team and the entity >> that delivers the OS need to treat them as such. This means that if the >> upstream source changes in a way that is counter to that classification, >> then something must be done to maintain backward compatibility beyond >> just sucking the upstream sources unmodified. That has been done >> before... >> > > Sun has a contract with ISC and Stacey maintains that relationship. I > made changes to interface stability level after Stacey told me that > Sun would have a case with ISC if documented interfaces were changed > in an incompatible way. I have copied Stacey in case further > clarification is needed. > > Rao. > >> -Seb >> >> >
