On Dec 21, 2007 12:13 PM, Alessandro Zummo <azummo-lists at towertech.it> wrote: > On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:06:09 -0500 > "m. allan noah" <kitno455 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > actually- this idea is growing on me. it prevents the need to fork > > sane and do a separate 1.1 branch- we can require that the new frame > > types be protected by '--standard=1.1', and that well-known option can > > have a warning, and front-ends that dont support certain minor > > versions of the standard can hide them, and front-ends that do can > > enable them by default. no bump in the SONAME keeps external backends > > happy. > > > > there must be some downsides, however- opinions? > > mm. a frontend could display this as a gadget and thus > the user could enable a standard the frontend does not support? >
yes- This is one advantage of a new standard version with a new SONAME, frontends could be build against it as-is, but frontend authors get more warning that something has changed. allan -- "The truth is an offense, but not a sin"
