From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Subject: Re: Formal submission of Xtables2
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:16:15 +0100
Message-ID: <20121213151615.GA6962@1984>
References: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1212130601210.9421@nerf07.vanv.qr>
 <20121213110046.GA22337@1984>
 <alpine.LNX.2.01.1212131214100.20007@nerf07.vanv.qr>
 <20121213120509.GA26118@1984>
 <alpine.LNX.2.01.1212131405170.786@nerf07.vanv.qr>
 <20121213142820.GA3489@1984>
 <alpine.LNX.2.01.1212131528410.1273@nerf07.vanv.qr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Netfilter Developer Mailing List
	<netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Netfilter user mailing list <netfilter@vger.kernel.org>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@inai.de>
Return-path: <netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1212131528410.1273@nerf07.vanv.qr>
Sender: netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 03:53:45PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
[...]
> In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with keeping some concepts. A
> developer is not required to reevaluate and reinnovate every concept
> there has been just for the heck of it. (The old "evolution, not
> revolution" credo.) Throwing everything overboard generally does not
> turn out to work these days.

Nobody is going to throw everything overboard. Nftables is backward
compatible while providing a new framework, revolutions are never
backward compatible.