Re: Static class
Marco Deleu
>
>> You may have core developers that voted no due to maintenance burden, but if said
>> maintainer is no longer active and new maintainers don't mind it, it's a moot argument
>> because people changed.
>
> The maintenance burden argument is actually a good example of *not* being about individuals.
> The argument is not "I don't want to maintain it", it's "we shouldn't
> burden future maintainers with this".
I don't agree that maintainers 10 years ago choosing to not "burden future maintainers
with this" is more valid than current maintainers choosing otherwise. As I said, too much has
changed and so has the weight of the burden (for better or worse).
> All I'm asking is that if we are going to revisit features we previously rejected, we
> start with "here's why I think the arguments for and against this feature have
> changed", rather than "I don't like the old result, I demand a new vote".
You think a good place to start is to pinpoint what changed. I think that in 10 years *everything*
has changed. I wasn't giving a list of possible abstracts" for us to discuss each of them,
I was pointing out how easy it is to come up with multiple reasons why a new vote might go a
different direction.
I don't like the old result but I don't think there is any "demanding a new
vote". There is simply new people interested in something that coincidentally happened to have
had an interest a decade ago.
Thread (32 messages)