> On 14 Nov 2017, at 16:57, Frediano Ziglio < fzig...@redhat.com > wrote:
> > > > On 14 Nov 2017, at 16:22, Frediano Ziglio < fzig...@redhat.com > wrote:
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > From: Christophe de Dinechin < dinec...@redhat.com >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Christophe de Dinechin < dinec...@redhat.com >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > ---
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > include/spice-streaming-agent/plugin.hpp | 2 +-
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > diff --git a/include/spice-streaming-agent/plugin.hpp
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > b/include/spice-streaming-agent/plugin.hpp
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > index 727cb3b..607fabf 100644
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > --- a/include/spice-streaming-agent/plugin.hpp
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > +++ b/include/spice-streaming-agent/plugin.hpp
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ class FrameCapture;
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > * where MM is major and mm is the minor, can be easily expanded
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > * using more bits in the future
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > */
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > -enum Constants : unsigned { PluginVersion = 0x100u };
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > +enum Constants : unsigned { PluginVersion = 0x001u };
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > enum Ranks : unsigned {
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > > /// this plugin should not be used
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > > Nack... ABI not compatible
> > >
> >
>
> > > Precisely. We should not have started at 1.0. I think it’s still time to
> > > fix
> > > it.
> >
>
> > > Christophe
> >
>
> > Going backward? Would not be easier to get to 1.1 instead?
>
> > Also 0x1 does not fit with the comment above.
>
> Yes. I think that what we build presently should be labelled as 0.01, not
> 1.0.
> Unless you consider this ABI / API to be good enough to be labelled 1.0,
> which I do not, because it still lacks some very basic amenities.
You acked 0x100 so now is quite too late to get back.
If you consider that not "fixed" we can keep the number, if we consider fixed
we'll bump it.
> Now, it’s only an internal number, so I don’t mind much going to 2.0 instead
> if you prefer. It cannot be 1.1, because that would be seen as compatible.
> But I thought 0.01 was fairer to the actual state of the API, while also
> indicating a compatibility break.
I would try to extend maintaining API/ABI if possible. As far as I can see
your mainly concerns are lack of some features.
> For an actual release, we can skip 1.0 if we fear there is any risk because
> at some point we used 1.0.
Frediano
_______________________________________________
Spice-devel mailing list
Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
