2006/1/5, Rodrigo Moya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 09:24 -0600, Daniel Espinosa wrote: > > One question... > > > > If the chages made for Vivien, ADD new API to libgda; is it necesary > > to jump to 3.0 series? Is it not too fast? > > > > I think a good product need to be stable enough to usable in > > production; even in API/ABI. > > > that's why I proposed putting Vivien's changes before 2.0, and after > that, try to not break the API in a while. > > Vivien, what do you think? Big API changes have proved to be a problem > (bindings, porting apps, etc), so if we could reduce it, it would be > great.
The changes I've made do break the current API/ABI. The reason is that it's a reorganization of the objects between libgda and libgnomedb. I could not simply only ADD to the existing API even though I understand the need for stability. Basically the reorganization bas the following benefits: - less lines of code - more features - easier to understand and more coherent API - makes room for future improvements - better testing framework This reorganization is a necessary step as I discovered while I tried to add more features to libgnomedb, and because of historical reasons (as I first merged the mergeant functionalities into libgnomedb). I don't expect anymore such big changes afterwards (understand: we can have long stabilization periods afterwards). The current stage is that libgda works well, and that libgnomedb compiles and I expect it to work quite soon. If you really want to postpone the 2.0 release by a few months, then we can make those modifications into it; that would be worth. Vivien _______________________________________________ gnome-db-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-db-list
