It is never necessary, and always inelegant, to write or say "going forward". Also, it stinks of corporate-speak.
The English language already has a future tense, and this bit of redundancy makes sentences sound more contrived and clunky. Simple rule of style for writing: if you can remove something and keep the meaning intact, remove it. No regrets. "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication".
"Going forward" means "from now on, but not including the past". Going forward is a much easier way of saying "from now on, but not including the past". I'm willing to accept that there is a better way, but I'd like to hear what that is. And it can't just be dropping the words "going forward", for the reason I've already explained.
Adding "going forward" does not remove this ambiguity. You just happen to know the correct answer. I still assumed that existing ones would also be Linux-ready, until I read your comment.
> "Going forward" means "from now on, but not including the past".
No, it just means "from now on". It has the exact same meaning as the future tense.
Your comment confirms something I suspected: unnecessary linguistic mannerisms and corporate clichés are a symptom of confused thinking.
Going forward, I will add this to my list of arguments. But not in my past discussions.
I remember the first time I heard this cretinous locution used by a fellow countryman (rather than an American corporate type from whom you'd expect no better). I was gobsmacked and ignored the rest of what he said.