On 14/09/10 06:37, Artyom wrote:
>>
>> OK, so  you're suggesting to maintain SOCI version and SOVERSION
>> separately what will  mean in practice that SOVERSION is not reflected in
>> any way in SOCI version.  For example, following versions are possible:
>>
>> SOCI 3.1.0 with SOVERSION  5
>> SOCI 3.5.0 with SOVERSION 5 (no api change)
>> SOCI 3.5.1 with SOVERSION 6  (patch release with api change)
>> SOCI 3.6.0 with SOVERSION 7 (minor release  with api change)
>> SOCI 4.0.0 with SOVERSION 7 (major relase, no api change  happened)
>>
> 
> 
> Please note, SOVERSION is not about API it is about ABI.

Artyom,

You're correct, of course.
I had replied a bit in rush, so my mistake.

> AFAIK soci does not put too much effort in keeping ABI stable (correct me if 
> I 
> wrong) in such case you probably should update SOVERSION almost any release.

Yes, you're right, as far as my own understanding goes.

Maciej, any comments to that?

> This is very good reading: 
> <http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Binary_Compatibility_Issues_With_C++>
> 
> Keeping ABI is quite hard in C++, so if you don't sure it is better to 
> increase
> SOVERSION each release.

Indeed. Considering patch level releases include fixes only and never
touch API/ABI, then I'd suggest to chnage SOVERSION every minor release
then.

Anyway, we still have time to discuss it...

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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