3 ms·
I mean, you argument is that we should all lie about what the "upgrade/hardfork" is, because the truth could cause controversy. This change is not backward com
by stale2002 9y ago
I mean, you argument is that we should all lie about what the "upgrade/hardfork" is, because the truth could cause controversy.
This change is not backward compatible. Therefore it is a hardfork. Full stop.
- organsnyder 9y agoTo many familiar with open source, "fork" implies some sort of intractable difference: personality, legal, technical decision, etc. "Incompatible change" seems more accurate, at least based on terms I'm used to hearing.
- meirelles 9y agoI think it's not about lying, but very often software upgrades are not backward compatible, in that case, everybody should upgrade, that's all. It is probably more intuitive concept for the mainstream market than saying "a hard fork is coming soon".