Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Welcome to the Monastery

Re^4: RFC: CGI::Uploader V 2.90_01

by ron.savage (Novice)
on Dec 04, 2008 at 02:43 UTC ( #727855=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^3: RFC: CGI::Uploader V 2.90_01
in thread RFC: CGI::Uploader V 2.90_01

I see your point. I was concerned that the changes would be assessed in a tiny-point by tiny-point manner, which would obscure the view of the overall redesign. Also, I want people using the previous version to stop and think about their app design, not just expect that a couple of lines need to be changed. That's why the version has jumped to 2.90* in preparation for release as V 3.

Comment on Re^4: RFC: CGI::Uploader V 2.90_01
Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: RFC: CGI::Uploader V 2.90_01
by Zen (Deacon) on Dec 12, 2008 at 19:08 UTC
    If you have rewritten and broken backwards compatibility, and you don't know of/don't care about the migration of existing users (I hear you saying, if it doesn't work then their design is bad and thus their fault), why not make it a new module entirely or a subclass? I'd be upset if I upgraded a module and found it was wildly different, requiring me to rewrite my app if I wanted to use it.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://727855]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chilling in the Monastery: (2)
As of 2015-11-27 05:43 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    What would be the most significant thing to happen if a rope (or wire) tied the Earth and the Moon together?

    Results (719 votes), past polls