> On 03 Mar 2015, at 15:25, Ben Coman <[email protected]> wrote: > > You could do "staged" reduction in support. Back one version might get > general bug fixes. Back two or more versions might only get cleanup method > renames. Now the idea with pushing method renames back is that its not just > about backward support, but about showing people the way forward, and also > about reducing friction to make such cleanup changes. > > Would it be feasible to have a community maintained PharoForwardCompatability > package available in the ConfigurationBrowser that is generally available for > everyone to use, rather than everyone needing to roll their own? Maybe this > is even something that Grease etc might reference?
Yes, yes, yes ! I am all for the renaming, but with some backward support like you describe. Like you say, it is very, very simple. It is a simple service to all external packages, instead of letting each of them solve it on their own. And no, for everything else this is *not* needed.
