Re: remove libgtop_names ?

On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 19:43 +0100, Beno�Dejean wrote:
> Le dimanche 05 d�mbre 2004 �9:15 +0100, Torsten Schoenfeld a �it :
> > On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 12:39 -0500, Curtis Hovey wrote:
> > 
> > Yeah, agreed.  Every library should strive to stay API compatible.
> well, what is an API ? if it's everything in public headers,
> libgtop_names is. But if an API is something __documented__, maintained
> and used, libgtop_names is not.

All private C API (vars, structs, functions, etc) should be placed in a
file or directory with 'private' in its name to explicitly declare it is
not for public use.  Baring this, the situation is not clear.  Some
documentation in the GNOME dependencies make mention of data structures
that are private to discourage developers from making use of them.  The
fact 2.x documentation *never* mentioned the API implies it is not
public and is not stable.  I think you are free to remove or alter those
parts of the API.  You may wish to review older versions of the code
(2.0 and 2.2) to make sure there was no mention of the APIs.


__C U R T I S  C.  H O V E Y____________________
sinzui cox net
Guilty of stealing everything I am.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]