Dan wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gagan Saksena) writes:
> 
>>      o Discussing library versioning with Blizzard and Valeski. 
> 
> 
> Any chance you could repost the discussion and continue it here?
> 
> Dan
> 

There was more, but this sums it up pretty good.


Hello Chris,

Versioning sounds like a good idea as XPCOM interfaces are *not* going 
to be frozen as is.  We have worked hard to define a set of interfaces 
which allow a basic COM capablities.  The current set of frozen 
interfaces allow component registration and access, object 
notifications, and memory management.
Although I am not totally sure on exactly what every embedding 
application are using, they should strive to not link to XPCOM. Attached 
is a article I wrote which may address some of the issues. Please review 
it and let me know what you think.

Doug Turner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Christopher Blizzard wrote:

I'd like to be able to install libxpcom into system wide directories so 
it can be used by external applications.  To do so, we really should 
version libxpcom or freeze all of the public interfaces therein.  So, 
Doug, how far away are we from having frozen interfaces?  And if we 
don't have them, can we start using soname versioning and library name 
versioning?

--Chris




Reply via email to