On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Not sure if that will cause confusion, the soname and real version not
> being related is normal under Linux, if that is different under Windows,
> we might consider putting 1.2 in the dll name under Windows. But that is
> your call.

To be honest, I do not like the current Windows dll name at all,
libusb-1.0.dll, it should have been called libusb1.dll.

And libusb-1.2.dll will not get my like either.

For reference, libusb-win32 has been through version of 0.1.x, 1.1.x and
1.2.x releases
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libusb-win32/files/libusb-win32-releases/

>>> Or we could drop my "all: The next release will be 1.2.0 not 1.0.16"
>>> commit and simply go with 1.0.16. Unless we've some agreement
>>> on this beforehand I'll drop that commit before I push things to
>>>  libusbx master tomorrow, so that will be 1.0.16 for now then, and
>>> we can always add that commit + fixes later to make it 1.2.0
>>
>> Right now, that's most likely what I'll have to vote for.
>> Damn, are we condemned to keep 1.0 till the end of time?

It seems to me that it is way easier to use 1.0.16 and not 1.2.0.
If we go for 2.0 then yes changing the names of the dll and other
things are worth the efforts. But since we need to stick to 1.x now,
1.2.0 does not really offer much than 1.0.16, other than the extra
work...

> Nope, only till we add a better poll abstraction, and then also throw in
> all the other API cleanups we want to do.

Okay...

-- 
Xiaofan

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite
It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production
Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead.
Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap2
_______________________________________________
libusbx-devel mailing list
libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel

Reply via email to