On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Wichmann, Mats D
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Sergio Schvezov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>
>> I'm currently taking recommendations to implement obtaining the proxy
>> from system configuration, most people seem to recommend libproxy,
>> which is fine. The problem I see with it is that if you take a look at
>> the MeeGo Compliance document (latest:
>> http://wiki.meego.com/images/MeeGo-Compliance-Spec-1.1.80.1.pdf),
>> you'll find it is marked as dep and not as core.
>>
>> As an application developer that might seek forward compatibility, the
>> fact that this is not part of the *MeeGo API* and secondly, that it is
>> marked as dep bring in concerns.
>>
>> Is it possible to have this included as part of the API or is there a
>> project underway to have Qt implement this functionality wrapping
>> around libproxy or something?
>>
>> core, is forward compatibility guaranteed if linking against core
>> symbols which are not listed in the MeeGo API?
>
> I had responded privately that libproxy didn't seem to be in the set at all
> for 1.2, but it turns out it's now provided by the pacrunner package. It's
> still in the category of not being part of the "MeeGo API" and that means
> there are no promises outside of the release in which it appears.  The
> core/dependency distinction is conceptually that "core" means it appears in
> the architecture diagram, and "dependency" means it doesn't, but is still
> needed for a functional stack.

So can we guarantee forward compat for pacrunner/libproxy or not?
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
http://wiki.meego.com/Mailing_list_guidelines

Reply via email to