Hi, On 06/03/2013 09:22 AM, Ludovic Rousseau wrote:
<snip> > Note that I was talking about ABI change, not API. > > If you can't write the API header file so that old code can stile > compile with a newer version then you have to create a new library. > You can call it libfoo1 (and libfoo1.so.0) instead of libfoo. But > remind that this is a versioning of the API, not a release number. > > With libfooA.so.B > - if the ABI change then update B > - if the API change then update A and set B=0 Good summary of this long discussion! So for the next libusb release, we change neither, so we stay with libusb-1.0.so.0, and likewise libusb-1.0.pc. As said we could still make it version 1.2.0 on the tarbal, docs, get_version API level, etc. But if people prefer to call it 1.0.16 that is fine too. With this all said and done can we please have a decision (I guess we vote?) on which one it is going to be ? I vote blank. Regards, Hans ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
