← Back to context

Comment by fmbb

2 days ago

Adding support again later is cheap.

Stopping maintaining and testing support for upcoming versions is cheaper than doing that work.

Sure it’s political but it is also just a sane approach, to stay away from such disruptive change and treat it as wait-and-see instead of tagging along for the ride. There is not really any technical upside to tagging along and promising support.

15 comments

fmbb

Reply
dmix  2 days ago

> Stopping maintaining and testing support for upcoming versions is cheaper than doing that work.

If it’s based on predictions of how some alpha software might turn out in the future then I don’t see how you can claim it’s cheaper.

If a bunch of new bug reports came in then you said no, then everyone would understand.

This is pretty obviously ideological otherwise. Which is fine, but we shouldn’t pretend otherwise because we might agree with it

  • fmbb  11 hours ago

    I don’t thing maintaining and testing support for an extra runtime is free.

    It is by definition cheaper to not support extra runtimes like Kaluma, Elsa, WinterJS. Adding support is not just the initial work of adapting CI and writing policies, maintenance and support is ongoing work.

  • kelnos  2 days ago

    I think it's perfectly rational to take a wait-and-see approach when a dependency has been completely rewritten from scratch.

    That would still be rational if it had been rewritten by hand, and not by an LLM.