Re: Removing (yes) unloved API/ABI from gnome-vfsmm

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Fri, 2006-07-14 at 18:45 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
> Hi Murray,
> 
> Le jeudi 13 juillet 2006, �9:24, Murray Cumming a �it :
> > Since gnome-vfs removed some functions [1], gnome-vfsmm is pretty much
> > forced to remove the API that wraps these functions. I hate to break
> > ABI, but I really doubt that anybody is using this part of gnome-vfsmm,
> > and I think people will thank us for not depending on bonobo.
> > 
> > But this is me asking for GNOME release-team permission retrospectively.
> > Any objections?
> 
> I'm wondering about three things:
> 
>  + "This means that you may break API/ABI in the next schedule only if
>     you create a new version of the API which is parallel-installable
>     with the older version."
>    http://live.gnome.org/ReleasePlanning/ModuleRequirements/PlaformBindings
>    Is it possible to do this?

That would make life difficult for a lot of people, because they'd have
to port overt to the new ABI, waiting for packages to be deployed, etc,
whereas I think the current small ABI break will actually affect nobody
in the real world.

>  + Forgetting about ABI, is it possible to keep the API (with some
>    #define, maybe)?

I could keep the functions, with empty implementations.

>  + If someone complains about this breaking an app, what will you do?

Investigate and revert it necessary.

> Also, I'm still wondering if what the gnome-vfs maintainers did is okay
> with our API/ABI compatibility rules. It did break stuff (bindings :-)),
> so...

I think they should have asked you.

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