On 10/3/2012 12:15 PM, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene wrote: >> obviously pretty huge backwards compatibility issues for grammars >> written based on current semantics; I'd suggest leaving it be. > > This is what versions are for, just make a major version bump.
Sure, that makes it follow 'semver', but it doesn't make it any less inconvenient for developers who need to deal with backwards incompat! I mean, I guess it advertises that you might want to be sure to check on backwards compat to not be caught by it unawares, so that's good. But it's not like it's suddenly not inconvenient to deal with for users with backwards compat issues! The idea that as long as you tell users properly about backwards compat (that's all major-version-bump/semver is, a way to properly advertise backwards compat coming).... it doesn't bother anyone or cause them any inconvenience... is an odd one. An odd notion that does seem to be quite popular in rubyland. :) Or course, sometimes you need backwards incompat anyway. It's Kaspar's call. My suggestion/opinion remains that introducing huge backwards incompat problems is something best avoided.
