On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 13:35 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote: > On 1/20/06, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <gjc inescporto pt> wrote: > > Sex, 2006-01-20 às 09:10 -0700, Elijah Newren escreveu: > > > > I make a best effort (which is sometimes lacking, in particular I just > > > realized I've always forgotten to notify the bindings people -- which > > > is perhaps why you see it as no different) to at least notify apps > > > that I know are affected and often also provide patches. > > Note the above parenthetical comment... > > > > I wouldn't bother notifying anyone if I broke ABI of > > > libmetacity-private (other than control-center), even if it was during > > > a micro point release during the stable cycle. > > > > This already happened once with wnck, with nasty results: > > http://www.daa.com.au/pipermail/pygtk/2006-January/011660.html > > But we understand the limitations of API guarantees and live with it. > > Yup, this was an example of where I sucked as mentioned in the > previous comment. I probably should have notified bindings in the > past of wnck API/ABI changes. Would it make sense to do so in the > future? Would a mail to language-bindings@ be sufficient for that > purpose? I think that API/ABI changes will be noticed after a while and fixed. But if library authors change API/ABI very near the GNOME release date, the errors could go unnoticed until too late. I propose the following: if there's an API/ABI break after the GNOME API freeze deadline (which only applies for gnome devel platform modules, of course), then desktop library maintainers are strongly advised to notify bindings authors by sending an email to the language-bindings list. This should be enough, I think. > > > So I've finally released the split g-p-e/g-p-d packages, leaving > > metacity in g-p-e and untouched. I almost thought about renaming to > > you mean g-p-d? ;) Yes, of course. Sorry. :) > > > metacity.private, but it's ugly, and I thought this discussion had died > > out with no much concern. At the time I received this email, I had > > already uploaded the packages. I hope this will not cause much concern, > > but I guess renaming the module or issuing a warning during import is > > still a viable option. > > Nah, don't worry about the renaming or giving a warning. As you've > pointed out, this really is not different for you than how you've had > to deal with wnck in the past; since you're fine with that, I don't > see any problems. Thanks. Regards, -- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <gjc inescporto pt> <gustavo users sourceforge net> The universe is always one step beyond logic
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part