On 2013-11-05, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>>> Having a general FRAMEWORK_X_Y define wouldn't be bad. But maybe
>> every
>>> FRAMEWORK_X_Y should read as "FRAMEWORK_X_Y_OR_ABOVE" since
>> every framework
>>> is compatible to its ancestors.
>> fine with me, I'll make the adjustments.
> Awesome.
not y
On 2013-11-04, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> Having a general FRAMEWORK_X_Y define wouldn't be bad. But maybe every
> FRAMEWORK_X_Y should read as "FRAMEWORK_X_Y_OR_ABOVE" since every framework
> is compatible to its ancestors.
fine with me, I'll make the adjustments.
> Still I would keep these defin
