Re: [PATCH 2/3] completion: remove old code

> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Felipe Contreras
> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We are not talking about backwards compatibility; we are talking about
>> compatibility of remotes completion of the bash completion script of
>> repositories more than 3 years old with remotes that haven't been
>> migrated.
>
> What's not backward about that?

>> This barely resembles the git-foo -> 'git foo', which truly broke
>> backwards compatibility, and at the time I proposed many different
>> approaches to deal with these type of problems, which seem to be
>> followed now (although probably not because of my recommendations).
>>
>> But this has nothing to do with _attitude_; I am merely stating fact.
>> I have never expressed any opinion or attitude with respect to how
>> backwards compatibility should be handled in this thread, have I?
>
> As far as I know you haven't explicitly said anything about that.
> There may still be a possibility that the sentence Junio quoted in his
> reply could have implied a certain attitude.

>>> Maybe numbers for this could be generated from the next git user
>>> survey. If numbers justify this change, maybe this or something like
>>> it could be scheduled for a major release of git.
>>
>> Maybe, but I doubt this issue hardly deserves much discussion.
>
> I wouldn't know about that. Apparently not everybody is happy with
> applying it without further discussion.