Re: Views for demoralizing

Alfredo Novoa wrote:

> Jonathan Leffler <jleffler_at_earthlink.net> wrote:

>>Backwards compatibility is an incredibly heavy shackle, forever 
>>constraining that which one would like to do.

I wish I could say that to our customers. And SQL had the 'no constraint' syndrome once upon about 30 years ago, but soon (very soon) became shackled by backwards compatibility. By 1986, the locks were firmly in place.

>> People like RequiredTech (of reputed TRDBMS fame) who can start
>> from scratch are much better off - right up until they release
>> version 2.0.

Well, it depends a bit on their release numbering strategy, but when it is first released (presumed to be version 1.0) they have no installed base, and hence nothing to shackle them. By the time they get to release 2.0, they have some customers using their software who will probably be irritated if some feature they are relying on no longer works - even if it is a bug they are relying on. As soon as you have customers using the system in production, you are constrained by them and backwards compatibility becomes a major issue.

-- 
Jonathan Leffler                   #include <disclaimer.h>
Email: jleffler_at_earthlink.net, jleffler_at_us.ibm.com
Guardian of DBD::Informix v2003.04 -- http://dbi.perl.org/