Re: Debian package and development of CONS

[Dominique Dumont]

"H. S. Teoh" <address@hidden> writes:

> My point was that we can add backward compatibility later. But for
> the initial effort, we want to get something off the ground that
> works, so we shouldn't get bogged down by backward compatibility at
> first. Of course, we should still leave room for backward
> compatibility to be added once we got something working.
>
> My view is that backward compatibility isn't the foremost concern
> here; the current Cons still works reasonably well for existing
> scripts. People don't *have* to migrate until we got something that
> works on top of SCons.

This strategy will make a transition from older cons to next cons more
tricky. But given the shortage on people working on cons, you
certainly have a point here.

Looks reasonable enough to me.

Cheers

-- 
address@hidden