* Cliff Woolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > > Uhmmm, this isn't an MMN bump :) If you were adding this new > > structure *type* as a member of another structure (say as the last > > member of the conn_rec) and the structure grew (in such a way that > > folks could be blindly oblivious to the fact that conn_rec just got a > > bit bigger), that's an MMN bump. It's not the case here. > > I disagree. If you add a function to the API without bumping the MMN, > then how is a module that wants to use the new function if it exists and > yet still compile if it doesn't supposed to work? It can't.
Yes, that's my understanding as well: major bumps break backwards compat and minor bumps keep forward compat. nd
