Re: Procedural (non-technical) point about freezing the cat and hat combinators before they've even been defined (was Re: Shadow DOM: Hat and Cat -- if that's your real name.)

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Dimitri Glazkov <> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Boris Zbarsky <> wrote:
>> Can you please clearly state what your plans are
>> for shipping the feature, freezing or not freezing functionality, and
>> resolving the outstanding disagreements about the behavior?
> On freezing: A "frozen API" is glorious concept, but I don't see how it
> would work. If Blink does go forward with enabling the API by default, it as
> a project accepts all responsibility for any future API changes. That's one
> reason I expect he intent-to-ship discussion to be exciting.

By the way, I deeply apologize for the confusion revolving around my
use of the term "freeze".  That term is used internally (within the
Blink team) to indicate something that's no longer changeable (or at
least is probably too difficult to change) *due to compat pain*.  I'm
aware that there are other uses of the term, like "feature freeze",
that imply a much more deliberate *decision* by somebody to stop
making changes.

I forgot about those additional meanings and was intending just the
more popular internal meaning.  While I've certainly used that meaning
in public, and have heard other people use it or other relatively
close phrasings, I should have given more thought to the term and used
something less likely to be confusing.

Mea culpa. :/


Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 18:57:28 UTC