On 06/06/2012 10:28 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 14:21:40 -0700 > Zac Medico <zmed...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> You'd have a slot per ABI, and be encouraged to allow multiple >>> versions of glib to be installed in parallel. If you really >>> couldn't do that (and you should think very carefully before saying >>> you can't, since this directly affects users in a huge way), you >>> can make the slots block each other. >> >> It seems like you're trying to make glib fit your SLOT operator model, >> even though it's a natural fit for the ABI_SLOT operator model. > > No, I'm trying to strongly encourage people to make proper use of slots > to avoid having mass breakages and annoyances on user systems, even if > it means more work for developers.
But aren't you also trying to make them deviate from upstreams' release models? > Broken linkage due to an upgrade really shouldn't happen. It's certainly not ideal, but wouldn't it be useful to have the flexibility to accommodate it? Let's be practical. -- Thanks, Zac
