On 4/2/06, Bojan Smojver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > 1.3.x is compatible with 1.2.x in the sense that programs compiled > > against 1.2.x must continue to run against 1.3.x. The reverse is not > > true, which is why in minor version number bumps we can add new > > functions. To remove functions (or macros for that matter, although > > that's for reasons of compile time compat, not runtime) we need to > > bump the major version. > > Right. Given that, then we can have (like you said) a bunch of new > name macros defined for all the exisiting functions with incorrect > names in 1.3.x. The get_name functions can indeed become name_get > immediately - there should be no harm in that.
Yep. > And 2.x can then reverse the situation by defining backward > compatibility macros for incorrect names and have proper new function > names, while deprecating the old ones. Or just drop them, that's usually what we do with deprecated stuff. If we add new names we'll likely deprecate the old ones at the same time. > Or should we just keep the existing broken names until 2.x? It'll be > less hassle... My level of caring is approaching zero rapidly ;-) -garrett
