Re: Update of libchamplain version in external dependencies

On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 22:03 +0200, Jiří Techet wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 06:46, Andy Wingo <wingo pobox com> wrote:
> > On Thu 19 Aug 2010 13:09, Jiří Techet <techet gmail com> writes:
> >
> >> right now libchamplain has the version number as a part of its name,
> >> e.g.
> >
> > If you encode a version into the name, use the stable version. If 0.7 is
> > a stable series, use -0.7 in the name. Otherwise if it is a development
> > series, use 0.8 or whatever the next stable series will be -- as GTK+
> > does.
> So does it mean I should use 0.8 in the name even for the development
> 0.7 releases? I can do that even though it's a bit unusual (but
> probably practical). I just took over the numbering scheme the
> previous maintainer used which I think was inspired by clutter's 0.x
> releases (the libraries were of the form, where
> odd x was a development version and even x was a stable version).

the library name for Clutter always used API version in the soname and
in the pkg-config file, to allow parallel installability.

the problem is that we defined the API version as "$major.$minor",
allowing parallel installability between development cycles and stable
cycles. it was actually a mistake we continued for a while, and I
strongly discourage anyone maintaining a library to follow that
particular scheme: development cycles should always have the pkg-config
and the soname of the next stable cycle, to allow an easier upgrade path
for application developers.



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