On Dec 21, 2007 3:19 PM, Julien BLACHE <jb at jblache.org> wrote: > "m. allan noah" <kitno455 at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > if i understand your list, there is a 4th option- add and _inform_ by > > SONAME/version# change. > > If we can avoid it, we should really avoid it. Though as you note it's > the proper course of action if the changes are important enough that > things could break. > > > Bumping the SONAME seems to be the only way to make the outside world > > aware that they should inspect their code for compatibility, but even > > if they do not, it will still work, since these new frame types will > > not be the default case. It also prevents us from having to do any > > modifications to the dozens of existing backends that wont have the > > new frame types or options. (unlike b and c). > > I think bumping the SONAME is going to have interesting effects wrt > proprietary backends. Now that I think about it ... :> >
yes- i've thought of that, and that is part of the reason i have been talking about possibly adding/clarifying some additional well-known options while we have their attention. Particularly WRT ADF option handling and the various MFP's out there. allan -- "The truth is an offense, but not a sin"
