[MPlayer-dev-eng] [POLICY] clarify conditions for functionality removal

[Diego Biurrun]

On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 10:01:18AM +0200, Ivan Kalvachev wrote:
> 2006/2/8, Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de>:
> > On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 11:23:24AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 09:16:59AM +0000, Ivan Kalvachev wrote:
> > > > 2006/2/5, Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de>:
> > > > > We have the following paragraph in our policy that forbids removing
> > > > > functionality from the code:
> > > > >
> > > > > 4. Do not change behavior of the program (renaming options etc) without
> > > > >    first discussing it on the mplayer-dev-eng mailing list. Do not
> > > > >    remove functionality from the code. Just improve!
> > > > >
> > > > > I think this needs to be revisited.  Removing functionality can make
> > > > > sense in certain cases (MHz counter anyone?) and should be allowed under
> > > > > certain conditions.  I therefore propose updating the policy to read:
> > > > >
> > > > > 4. Do not change behavior of the program (renaming options etc) or
> > > > >    remove functionality from the code without first discussing it
> > > > >    on the mplayer-dev-eng mailing list.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think this is closer to the way we handle the situation right now and
> > > > > makes more sense.
> > > >
> > > > We are not parlament or goverment that must follow the law. These
> > > > rules are just guide for us. We can always break them as long as
> > > > everybody agree that.
> > >
> > > Well, it kind of defeats the purpose of having rules if they can be
> > > broken arbitrarily..
> > >
> > > The CVS guidelines should describe the policy that we work with, not
> > > something different.  Fact is that we *do* accept removing features under
> > > certain circumstances.  All my patch does is fix the current practice in
> > > writing.
> >
> > Applied.
> 
> This is exactly the reason I do not want this text to be changed in it
> current form.
> 
> Your text says that you can remove functions after discussion, it
> doesn't say that e.g. everybody should agree with it.

Nonsense.  Before my change the paragraph read

 4. Do not change behavior of the program (renaming options etc)
    without first discussing it on the mplayer-dev-eng mailing list.

It doesn't say that everybody should agree with it either.

It's just plain common sense.  If X starts a discussion about something
on dev-eng and no consensus is reached and X proceeds with his plans
nonetheless people will complain.  It's as easy as that.

> I didn't agree with your change but you committed it anyway.

But you didn't respond for two full days..

> So... please reverse it and leave it as it was. The right way is to
> say when we can remove functions based on existing precedents, not
> open huge backdoor.

This is not a "huge backdoor", it just puts current practice (based on
existing precedents) into writing, nothing more.

Diego