Re: cpp in HEAD?

[Murray Cumming <murrayc usa net>]

On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 15:32, Michael Meeks wrote:
> 	Ultimately we have several criteria for the stuff going into HEAD,
> including ongoing ABI/API compatibility, etc. etc. so it's worth looking
> at carefully from that angle.

We obviously don't want to affect ABI/API stability of the C stuff, but
I believe that we have agreed that the C++ part will be unstable, and
possibly flaky, for a while. That's OK because they are so clearly
different APIs, used by different people/packages. It's impossible to
perfect it _until_ it gets into HEAD, because nobody will use it until
then, because no other packages can depend on it.

> 	I hope that's ok ? AFAIR 2.0.1 is due out 1st week of August, so can we
> start folding it all in then; I'm afraid it's really looking like a 2.1
> feature [ the C++ work ], but then again it's ~4-6 months before we
> release 2.1, and most distros will work from the 2.1 branch for releases
> (we hope).
> 
> 	How does that sound ? if that's too painful we could possibly branch
> sooner.

1. It will probably take us 2 more weeks to get orbit-cpp-cactus ready
anyway, but I wanted to start the discussion as soon as possible.

2. These branching issues don't feel like good enough reasons to keep
the cpp stuff out for yet more months or even weeks. We patiently waited
until "after GNOME2" and now it's time to get things moving.

3. They only exist in the same module so that they can share non-public
API. The cpp stuff will not affect the C stuff. At the moment our
headers even have .hh prefixes, so it's obvious when we edit a .h/.cc
file instead of a .hh/.cc file.

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc@usa.net
www.murrayc.com