On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 15:20, Vic Lee <ll...@163.com> wrote: > I think it's quite difficult to promise a stable or backward-compatible > API/ABI without significantly rewrite the current API. MS will just keep > adding new feature in the future and every time we implement a new > feature it will be easily break the compatibility. > > To provide an ideal API/ABI compatibility we need to rewrite the API and > eliminate accessing structs directly (rdpSet specifically), but provide > freerdp_get/set functions to access them. This is quite common in modern > libraries. However this also adds a small overhead, so it's really a > matter of whether it worth the effort.
I agree and that is not the problem here but when we break we need to bump soname so applications that has linked to older versions keep working. This avoids a lot of problems for distributions that supports it. This is not something we can /fix/ right now but something we ought to keep on mind to address as soon as possible. Specially because the set of applications linking against our libraries will grow up significally soon. The later we deal with it, worse will be the problem. Just my 2c ;-) -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Colocation vs. Managed Hosting A question and answer guide to determining the best fit for your organization - today and in the future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d _______________________________________________ Freerdp-devel mailing list Freerdp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freerdp-devel
