On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 13:12 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > As I understand it, an soname bump (from libfoo.so.5 to libfoo.so.6) > should *only* be used for backwards-incompatible changes.
Correct. One such example of a backwards-incompatible change is increasing the size of a public GObject class structure for which there exist or may exist subclasses. Hence the practice of reserving X number of pointers at the end of the class struct so X new methods can be added over time without altering the struct size. > If old clients can continue to use the newer library, then shouldn't it > be just a change of *minor* version from libfoo.so.5.2 to libfoo.so.5.3, > and the soname remains the same (libfoo.so.5). Yeah, we don't even do that much right. We usually just leave the soname alone from release to release unless we break compatibility. Blame me for not really groking libtool versioning practices, which just seems unnecessarily complex and confusing to my poor little mind. _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers mailing list email@example.com To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers