Re: GNOME Namespace Management - ARC & GNOME

["Murray Cumming" <murrayc murrayc com>]

> Murray Cumming wrote:
>> But I fear that we are talking about simple binary ABI-stability of the
>> GNOME Platform libraries. If SUN has found that they are not ABI-stable
>> then they should be telling us, because we want them to be ABI-stable,
>> and
>> we think they are.
>
> There were some examples posted earlier, eg:
>
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2004-December/msg00214.html
>
> I think the issue is that you're using a different definition of stable
> to what Sun is. Sun mean "backwards compatible", whereas you mean "has
> the same ABI" which is not the same. It's possible to not break the
> binary interface but still stop apps from working when they're upgraded,
> and GTK+ has done this in the past with full knowledge.

I know, and that's why I referred to that. But I am interested in
clarifying the statement that GTK+ is not ABI stable enough. Firstly,
those examples have not been about GTK+. And secondly, it's important when
making such statements to be clear about what you mean.

Please just let him explain what he meant rather than theorising.

Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com