Yes,
these API should be labeled as "Committed" .
James Carlson wrote:
> Irene Huang writes:
>
>> There are many projects that use gc, including
>>
> [...]
>
>> /usr/lib/libcord.so Volatile library
>> /usr/lib/libgc.so Volatile library
>> /usr/include/gc/*.h Volatile header files
>> /usr/lib/pkgconfig/bdw-gc.pc Volatile package config file
>>
>
> If there are many projects that depend on this library, and it
> presumably is thus well-constrained from ever making incompatible
> changes, then why would we advertise it as "Volatile," and thus tell
> our customers that we're likely to break it in a patch?
>
> Open source does *NOT* mean "Volatile." Please see LSARC 2008/059 for
> an extended discussion of this problem.
>
> I've looked over the author's documented change history, and I don't
> see why we'd want to count this as Volatile.
>
> http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/gc-announce.mbox/gc-announce.mbox
> http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/gc_source/recent_changes
>
>
