On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 07:28 +0200, Denis Arnaud wrote:
> 2010/9/14 Artyom <[email protected]>
>         Keeping ABI is quite hard in C++, so if you don't sure it is
>         better to increase
>         SOVERSION each release.
> 
> 
> That way, Mateusz' initial proposition seems sensible: SOVERSION ==
> MAJOR.MINOR
> For instance, I have never seen libraries with soname version made of
> large numbers (say, e.g., soversion >= 20), which would be the case if
> we just increase the soname version each time a release is made.
> What do you think?

There are libraries with high sonames, e.g. libmysqlclient is 16+
and libx264 even has a number higher than 80
The last soci release was 2 years ago, I do not think we have a problem
of exploding soversion if the pace does not change radically.

Maybe we need a definition what you understand as a minor version.
If it are just mostly bugfixes I see no reason to associate it with the
soversion. Not every bugfix will break the abi/api, even in c++.

I would stick with a unrelated number increased on change as almost
every other library out there.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances
and start using them to simplify application deployment and
accelerate your shift to cloud computing.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________
Soci-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soci-users

Reply via email to