10
Quote:
I agree backwards compat is good, but then again times are changing. Lots of 2.3 is going in the direction of a more secure site. I would say I would rather have a broken old code module not work than be compatible with "possible" unsecure code.
I don't see why compatibility has to imply unsecure or why securing old code implies incompatibility.
I think there are very few occasions where compatibility means insecure.
Unfortunatly, McDonald did not give any information on what is the nature or cause of the incompatibility or why XOOPS 2.3 would fail with his module.
As I read here in the thread that the module seems to work fine, I wonder at what exactly he was warning for?
But as he won't react any further, I guess we have to find it out ourselves the hard way.
I hope there is any ground to his warning and it is not a matter of
FUD from the ImpressCMS camp.