Expand compatibility descriptions

[gewarren]

Based on discussion with Mark Miller and Priya.

[PriyaPurkayastha]

cc @marklio

[marklio]

A couple of tweaks to the wording that make things a little more clear to me in this context. It feels like we should have a larger document with more complete definitions, and some examples. I'm requesting changes because the proposed wording seems to indicate that breaks are guaranteed. We rarely break things in this way. Typically, there is only a narrow breaking scenario.

[marklio]

I think this is a big improvement from a content perspective. I'm not entirely familiar with the template process to know whether this would be a breaking change to the template (would it make new issues different from existing ones and make it hard to to machine categorization, etc.)

[gewarren]

I think this is a big improvement from a content perspective. I'm not entirely familiar with the template process to know whether this would be a breaking change to the template (would it make new issues different from existing ones and make it hard to to machine categorization, etc.)

Thanks. We only just added these compatibility types, so I don't think any issues are actually labeled accordingly yet. A good time to make it right.