Hacker News Reader

Apple is welcome to do what they like (and it seems like they're offering alternatives that are at least equivalent, and possibly superior) but a "major release" has incompatible changes to APIs by definition.

View on HN

Mac OS X has gone through a large number of major releases without making binary incompatible changes to APIs. That may be one definition of "major release", but it's certainly not universal. In any case, I don't understand this discussion centered around whether OpenSSL is justified in doing this or that. It doesn't matter! Apple needs binary compatibility, OpenSSL does not provide it, Apple doesn't expose OpenSSl. That's it. The reasons why OpenSSL doesn't provide it, whether they're right or wrong or just sideways, simply do not matter.

OS X hasn't changed its major version number in over 10 years. :-)

iOS major version bumps frequently though...

"major release" != "major version number"

Besides, Apple's major OS releases are executed like a major version number bump regardless of how others outside the company do things. These bumps include deprecation markers and warnings for APIs with planned retirement. There's no technical reason to remove deprecated APIs (keeping them around forever) to support older apps.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com