4 Oct
2015
4 Oct
'15
2:52 a.m.
Henrik Nilsson <Henrik.Nilsson@nottingham.ac.uk> writes:
Again, Graham and I were not saying "don't break things". We were saying "if things are to be broken, then there had better be very compelling reasons".
That's a big difference.
You made a great argument, Henrik, and you've changed my enthusiastic +1 to +0, until it can be bundled with some other, more necessary, breaking change. John