Thomas Vander Stichele
thomas at urgent.rug.ac.be
Fri Sep 20 09:52:05 CEST 2002
> * Ronald Bultje <rbultje at ronald.bitfreak.net> [20020920 10:59]:
> > On Fri, 2002-09-20 at 13:57, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:
> > > we still release gstreamer with libgstreamer-(version).so.0.0.0 as the lib
> > > name.
> > >
> > > Shouldn't we start by dropping that version number and doing proper
> > > library versioning about now ?
> > >
> > > it's pretty important for packages and so on, since right now it forces a
> > > recompile of apps like gst-player, rhythmbox, gst-editor, ... when a new
> > > gstreamer version is out.
> > didn't we agree that we'd start doing this from 0.5.0 on? As long as we
> > don't have a stable API, versioning is pretty useless...
Why is it useless ? I mean, that's the point of doing lib versioning.
> I've tried to argue that we should have been bumping the interface
> -every- release so far. And no one seemed to mind for the couple early
> releases that I implemented it. ;)
> I'm +1 for libtool-style interface/age versioning as soon as possible.
I tend to (hold your breath for it) agree with taaz here ;)
In the past people have argued they didn't want libtool version explosion.
I agree with that, but given our current release frequency and the
fact we haven't *changed* much to our ABI (we did *add* stuff), we'll
hardly run into libtool version explosion any time soon.
The Dave/Dina Project : future TV today ! - http://davedina.apestaart.org/
Faded I'm sure
but love seems to stick in the veins you know
<-*- thomas at apestaart.org -*->
URGent, the best radio on the Internet - 24/7 ! - http://urgent.rug.ac.be/
More information about the gstreamer-devel