[cairo] Serious concerns about cairo

[Mike Emmel]

On 9/25/06, Daniel Amelang <daniel.amelang at gmail.com> wrote:
> Mike:
> > > the concept of AP/ABI freezes. And next why freeze it now whats the rush ?
>
> Carl:
> > "Why freeze it now" is an illogical question. We froze cairo in August
>
> It sounds like Mike's and Carl's understanding of the word "freeze" is
> really the issue. Mike seems to think that a frozen API cannot have
> any new additions, while Carl repeatedly points out that proposed
> additions to the frozen API are OK and expected, as long as backwards
> compatibility is maintained.
>
> Nah, a thread this long couldn't be just about such a simple misunderstanding :)
>
> Dan
>

First please no more posting on this thread I've got may concerns answered
I'm a happy with the decisions.

As far as if it was as simple as you suggest no but not a lot more complicated.
The concern was, its clear there is a need for quite a few api
additions and there was enough of the api outstanding I was concerned
that the decision to freeze have a negative impact since later
important additions may expose a need to change the api in a
incompatible way.
It bothered me enough to voice my concern since the answer was far
from obvious too me.

I'm sure even that could be said in a simpler fashion :)

Thanks for the responses and I am now a happy convert :)