Lamarque Vieira Souza <lamar...@gmail.com> writes:
> Em Tuesday 08 March 2011, Raphael Kubo da Costa escreveu:
>> Lamarque Souza <lamar...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > SVN commit 1223904 by lvsouza:
>> >
>> > Applying patch from http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/3260:
>> > Do not ask whether to come back from auto-away when there are no accounts
>> > connected Thanks Teemu Rytilahti for the patch.
>> >
>> > This patch is not meant to be backported to 4.6.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> > --- trunk/KDE/kdenetwork/kopete/libkopete/kopeteaccountmanager.h
>> > #1223903:1223904 @@ -111,6 +111,11 @@
>> >
>> > */
>> >
>> > Account *registerAccount( Account *account );
>> >
>> > + /**
>> > + * \brief Check if there is at least one account connected.
>> > + * \return true if there at least one account connected, false
>> > otherwise. + */
>> > + bool isAnyAccountConnected() const;
>> >
>> > /**
>> >
>> > * Flag to be used in setOnlineStatus
>> >
>> > @@ -218,7 +223,6 @@
>> >
>> > void removeAccountInternal();
>> >
>> > private:
>> > - bool isAnyAccountConnected() const;
>>
>> If Kopete's supposed to keep binary compatibility in libkopete, I guess
>> this change is a no-go, isn't it?
>
> I am no expert in binary compatibility but as far as I know adding a
> new
> method should not affect binary compatibility.
Adding a new method is OK. In this case, though, you're changing the
access rights to one method, making it public when it was previously
private. It is listed as a "DON'T" in [1] ("You cannot... -> For
existing functions of any type -> change its signature").
[1] http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Binary_Compatibility_Issues_With_C%2B%2B
> Anyway, binary compatibility in libkopete is a waste of time in my
> oppinion. No other program besides Kopete use that library
To begin with, it'd be good to know if we do guarantee binary
compatibility at all.
I'm CC'ing Matt Rogers as he probably has more information on this from
the old times. mattr?
> but there are a lot of people complaining about Kopete bugs in
> bugs.kde.org and several patches that should be already in Kopete,
> some of then are waiting more than a year to go in.
Erm, I think this is unrelated to the discussion.
_______________________________________________
kopete-devel mailing list
kopete-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kopete-devel
