On Tue, 7 Sep 1999, Brian Paul wrote:
> Here's another issue. There's an effort underway to standardize
> the OpenGL environment on Linux. One aspect of that is version
> numbering for the libGL.so file (used to be libMesaGL.so).
>
> I propose this lib name for the 3.1 release: libGL.so.1.2.310
> The 1.2 designates an implementation of the 1.2 API specification.
> The 310 designates the Mesa version number (3.1.0). The main idea
> is to allow Linux OpenGL apps to relink with other OpenGL
> implementations at load/runtime. Comments?
I think that the Mesa numbering scheme should simply be the
OpenGL version number and a consecutively incrementing third
number.
It's usual for the last number in a three part version number
to represent bug fixes and optimisations, and the first two
part to indicate changes that affect the API or user interface
significantly.
Since Mesa is just following the OpenGL API, the only time one
of the higher up numbers should change is when OpenGL changes -
and that's covered by picking the same version number as the
OpenGL spec.
So, I would simply renumber Mesa versions to continue from:
1.2.1
...starting with the next release. I think that would be
less confusing than running two sets of version numbers
in parallel (1.2.310 *and* 3.1) - although there would
of course be a small one-time confusion at the point of
switch.
(Does anyone even remember Mesa 1.x ?)
Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail)
Raytheon Systems Inc. (817)619-2466 (Fax)
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hti.com
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
_______________________________________________
Mesa-dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.mesa3d.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
