[ruby-core:25102] Re: [Backport #1975] Backport Dir.mktmpdir

Kirk Haines wrote:
> That distinction is somewhat blurry, though.  Some of the bugfixes
> have introduced implicit behavioral changes, and IMHO, that is OK so
> long as the behavioral change is required to fix the bug, or is more
> correct (as in some of the recent fixes with handling of Bignums,
> infinity, etc....).

I strongly agree with this.  I wrote it before but "to fix a bug is to change
something".  Bugfixes and behavioral changes are sometimes distinguishable, but
not always.  On really delicate situations, I don't know a way to say which.
That's one of a reason for me to believe Kirk on his decision; I may not have
other tactics than that.

> In general, I'm not adopting new features from
> 1.8.7, but where there is something that won't break existing code
> that depends on 1.8.6, and where there's an arguable benefit to
> backporting something that has already percholated through 1.8 HEAD
> and 1.8.7, I don't see harm in allowing that capability to fall
> through to 1.8.6.  There are a lot of changes that can't easily move
> from 1.8.7 to 1.8.6 because of larger, fundamental changes to the
> code.  In the case of Dir.mktmpdir, which is just a pure ruby addition
> to a class, and doesn't have a larger API that goes with it, I don't
> see a problem, especially since it, in turn, simplifies the test case
> code in at least two instances.

It's *my* preference when I was the 1.8.6 mentor, but if a change itself isn't
a bugfix, I might leave it unapplied.  That's the policy Tanaka-san stated as
"No new feature".  I analyzed myself and now I think it's because I think
people should move to a newer ruby in a long term.  More radically speaking, I
believe no new scripts should be written targeted to 1.8.6.  1.8.6 is for those
scripts that has already been written for it.  From that point, non-bugfix
changes aren't welcomed because I want to encourage people NOT to write a
script for 1.8.6.

> Contrast this with String#start_with?. That is also being used by the
> test_file_exhaustive.rb test set, but I won't consider backporting it
> because it is a far larger change that lives in the context of a
> number of other String class changes which are unlikely to be truly
> backwards compatible with existing 1.8.6 behavior.  1.8.6 should not
> mirror 1.8.7, because, IMHO, the progression in the 1.8 and 1.9 lines
> should encourage people to eventually move to those versions because
> of the advancements to be found there, but there are still a large
> number of people entrenched in 1.8.6, so modest refinements which can
> be backported without risk of breaking someone's code, and which offer
> some other tangible advantage, should be considered.

So policy differences between you and me is due to our difference in standing
points.  I want to make this world as ideal as I dream, while you have more
realistic point of view that this world is not as ideal as I dream.  People are
still living on top of 1.8.6.  It's true.  And we decided to let you manage
1.8.6.  The policy difference is easy to accept once I know this point.

> I am completely open to discussion regarding my perspective, though.
> If anyone thinks I should have a different policy, please speak up and
> tell me why.

I don't think you should have one.  What I wrote in this mail is I have a
different one.  Follow the path you believe.