On Tuesday 25 of February 2014 18:45:15 Kevin Ottens wrote: > On Tuesday 25 February 2014 17:12:37 Jonathan Riddell wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 04:55:43PM +0100, Kevin Ottens wrote: > > > OK, but then the said change is either in the packaging or in our own > > > cmake > > > files as we'd have to drop the SOVERSION later on when our version > > > becomes > > > 5.0.0. So it's really a question of which is more error prone. > > > > No change would be needed in the KF5 sources, SOVERSION would be set to 5 > > now and until KF6 comes along. > > I'm not fond of keeping duplicated information like that... but indeed > that's an option as well. Now I wonder though: what was Hrvoje's objection > exactly?
After reading all replies, i guess it does makes sense to have soversion at 5 (already). (i.e. it 'shouldn't' have been downgraded to 4 for first alpha - but just the soversion ;-), even though the soversion is kinda contained in library names) My objection was based on that we'll have a 4.96.0 release with so.4, and then suddenly with 4.97.0 at 5... Cheers, Hrvoje > Regards.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel