Re: John Palmieri joining the release-team

["John (J5) Palmieri" <johnp redhat com>]

On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 17:40 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> Dropping a binding should be really extreme thing that should almost never
> happen. We should do all we can to keep bindings on the schedule, because
> the bindings release set make a (vague) promise that those bindings will
> be well maintained in future.
> 
> We'd only want to drop a binding if it seemed like they would never get
> back on schedule, because that would just be a false promise that made the
> other bindings look bad.
> 
> I don't think there's any problem with the Java bindings.
> 

Well I think being part of the binding release means we support those
bindings for that release.  I agree we should do everything in our power
to make sure we don't drop a binding but if they look like they aren't
going to pull through then the older versions would not be dropped but
we just wouldn't endorse them for building applications in the future
and rely on ABI/API stability to hope the older bindings don't bit rot.
I think the point of the warning and real threat (not just an idle we
might drop you threat) is that it kicks peoples butts in gear.  If no
one care enough to get them into shape then obviously they were
underused to begin with.

-- 
John (J5) Palmieri <johnp redhat com>