From: ldo@nz.invalid   
      
   On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 20:36:11 +0100, gcalliet wrote:   
      
   > In the years 1990s, you had this concept of technical debt, but in   
   > the same time the backward compatibility was thought as a "must". I   
   > think about the port from VAX to Alpha, for example, with project   
   > like DEC Migrate for accompaniment, or rolling upgrade in mixed   
   > clusters.   
      
   So long as you understood that backward compatibility was only ever   
   going to be an interim thing, and not a forever thing, then you could   
   survive. It was to give you some breathing room to manage the upgrade   
   in a more organized fashion, not to put it off indefinitely.   
      
   > Now it seems you have to pay more if you want something like LTS.   
      
   Even that is just a slightly longer-timescale version of “interim”.   
      
   Just like regular monetary debt, technical debt accrues interest. And   
   the longer you defer it, the more painful it becomes to pay that off.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)