Re: NetworkManager 0.7 Released

[Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>]

On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 15:02 +0100, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 10:50:40PM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-11-29 at 22:59 +0100, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
> > Well... libnm-util did, but libnm-util for 0.6 was only meant to be used
> > between the applet and NM itself.  libnm_glib ABI/API should be the same
> > between 0.6 and 0.7, because the 0.7 libnm_glib actually includes all of
> > the 0.6 libnm_glib.
> 
> The NM applet is still an external application though and libnm-util is still
> a proper library. So proper library versioning is still something that needs to
> be done. Especially if nothing actually used it, then bumping the soname
> shouldn't be a hassle.

I understand how it's supposed to work, yes, but if we don't break the
ABI/API going forward past 0.7, should we bump the soname and require a
recompile of everything that uses libnm-util and libnm-glib now?  Or
just tell distros to set up a symlink?

Dan

> > What specifically doesn't work with the new libnm_glib that used to work
> > with 0.6?  AFAIK any 0.6 app linked against libnm_glib should still be
> > able to use the new libnm_glib.
> 
> Everything that uses nm_utils_essid_to_utf8 or nm_dbus_escape_object_path_item
> for example, which were symbols exposed by libnm_glib. If these weren't meant
> to be exposed then you might get away with not bumping the soname of -glib. As
> only those that actually pay attention will notice.
> 
> > What _doesn't_ work is parallel-installing NM 0.6 and NM 0.7.
> 
> The deamon sure.
> 
> > Ideally we don't break the libnm-util or libnm-glib API/ABI for post-0.7
> > unless we really have to, at which point the patch becomes useful...
> 
> I don't think sticking your head in the sand and ignoring everything before 0.7
> is responsible upstream maintaince. Things do break in ways they shouldn't when
> moving to 0.7 (the applet being the prime example here). Really bumping sonames
> is relatively and there are no excuses for not doing them when needed.
> 
> But yes, proper library maintaince is hard and almost everybody gets it wrong
> by not paying enough attention from the start to what actually their API/ABI
> is...
> 
>   Sjoerd