On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Robert Ramey
So, this would entail much more effort than meets the eye and with no real benefit.
-1
I am in no sense an expert on this, and absolutely yield the floor to those who know far more about it than I do, but isn't the whole point to do what requires least effort? In voting to remove MSVC6 support I'm expressing the sentiment that I see little need to maintain it, but if maintaining it is the easier route then I see no objection IN PRINCIPLE to doing so, beyond a general feeling that a leaner codebase is better than a bloated one. Is there a 'do nothing' option here? Ie., leave the codebase unchanged but no longer declare MSVC6 support, and so no longer require authors to support it? Just my $0.02 worth. - Rob.