On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:30:10PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote: > Hi Simon, > > Am Mittwoch, den 12.12.2012, 12:15 +0100 schrieb Simon Hengel: > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:20:35AM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote: > > > there really a change to the on-disk format of the .haddock files? > > > > Yes, the on-disk format changed, hence the interface version was bumped > > from 21 to 22. But Haddock can still read files with interface version > > 21 (see [1]). > > great! I was considering asking for backwards compatibility, but then > tought it might be a bit too much. > > For now I’ll hardcode the information that haddock support interface > version 21 in our package metadata, but this is error prone. Would you > mind adding an option akin to > $ haddock --interface-version > that would print all versions (e.g. space separated)? > > $ haddock --compatible-interface-versions > 21 22
Should be easy. Can you open a ticket? (of course, patches are always welcome ;) Cheers, Simon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121212113805.GA5486@x200
