[Uim] Short-term roadmap to uim 1.1.0

Etsushi Kato ekato at ees.hokudai.ac.jp
Thu Dec 1 08:31:44 EET 2005

On 2005/12/01, at 8:17, YamaKen wrote:

> At Wed, 30 Nov 2005 18:21:42 +0900,
> ekato at ees.hokudai.ac.jp wrote:
>> On 2005/11/30, at 1:42, YamaKen wrote:
>>>     - make soname of libuim proper
>> I'm a bit not sure about which -version-info will be appropriate for
>> the new release.  We've been using 0:1:0 until  From then,
>> we've added uim_set_configuration_changed_cb() interface and removed
>> some constance values about preedit attributes according to
>> doc/COMPATIBILITY.  This seems to match with category 4 in
>> "6.3 Updating library version information" in libtool's info.
>>    4. If any interfaces have been added, removed, or changed since the
>>       last update, increment CURRENT, and set REVISION to 0.
>> So 1:0:0 must be the new -version-info, is it correct?
> Because the word 'interface' indicates ABI rather than API in
> the context, the enum member removal in r2262 did not affect
> it. Since all the definitions were alias to currently available
> values, the ABI is surely not changed.
> So I think that 1:0:1 is appropriate for uim 1.0.0.

OK.  I didn't understand well about how to apply the description
on libtool's info.  I'll use 1:0:1 for libuim.  Also 1:0:1 for
libuim-custom since same rule is applicable as well.

> And I prefer preparing dedicated file to hold the version number
> infomation for each subdirectory, such as
> uim/libtool-version. It makes compatibility tracking easy for
> both developers and system integrators, and may be a conspicuous
> persistent reminder about version management for us. How do you
> think about it?

Fine.  Please go ahead.

Etsushi Kato
ekato at ees.hokudai.ac.jp

More information about the uim mailing list