On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 19:54:19 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 19:35:01 +1000 David Seikel <[email protected]> > said: > > > Do we want to return the library version? > > > > PACKAGE_VERSION? > > > > edje_version? > > > > EDJE_VERSION_MAJOR and EDJE_VERSION_MINOR? > > > > EDJE_FILE_VERSION and EDJE_FILE_MINOR? Should those be bumped to > > track Lua API changes to? > > > > Something new like EDJE_EXTERNAL_TYPE_ABI_VERSION? > > probably a table with 2 numbers - major and minor version. no micro. > > > And what about Lua version while we are at it? I think access to > > that was only introduced in Lua 5.2, and we already decided to not > > go there. > > no need - i suspect we will stick to 5.1 for a long time :) Um, we ended up supporting Lua 5.2 anyway. 5.1 is still what we recommend though. LuaJIT is basically 5.1 with some of the 5.2 extensions, but done as a 5.1 compatible thing. -- A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_jan
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
