On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 3:38 PM Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote: > > 16/01/2020 13:42, Ferruh Yigit: > > On 1/16/2020 11:54 AM, Neil Horman wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 12:25:06PM +0100, David Marchand wrote: > > >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 2:08 PM Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> > > >> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Moved RFC4115 APIs to none experimental as they have been there > > >>> since 19.02. Also, these APIs are the same as the none RFC4115 APIs. > > >>> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> > > >> > > >> There is a discussion on the OVS ml at the moment to get these symbols > > >> in the stable ABI for 19.11. > > >> I want to understand how this would be done. > > >> > > >> - I take this patch in 20.02, these symbols are added in the 20.0.1 ABI. > > >> On the other hand, the 19.11 release maintains the 20.0 ABI. > > >> > > >> Does it mean the backport adds these symbols with the 20.0 version in > > >> the 19.11 branch? > > >> Or is 20.0.1 version acceptable / a thing we want? > > We cannot have the symbol with different versions in different releases, > otherwise the compatibility is broken when upgrading. > So we have no choice, the symbol must have version 20.0.1 > in release 19.11.1, as in release 20.02.
Indeed, good point. > > >> - These symbol already existed in the 20.0 ABI, versioned as > > >> EXPERIMENTAL. > > >> We can go and remove these entries since we are not bound to preserve > > >> the experimental APIs. > > >> But, on the other hand, nothing should prevent us from keeping some > > >> aliases so that the symbols versioned EXPERIMENTAL are still available > > >> to existing users. > > >> > > > I would say that choice is up to you. If you want to alias them to be > > > nice to > > > prior users, thats fine by me. But experimental means experimental, and > > > so users > > > have to be prepared to rebuild when things change, even if that change is > > > changing the version from experimental to a concrete version. > > > > > > > I would prefer to keep the alias and don't break the existing users, > > specially > > for the case experimental API is becoming mature without change. > > I agree, it's cool to be nice :) Luca, opinion? -- David Marchand
