Garrett D'Amore wrote: > One of the implications of such a binding (Volatile), is that projects > which build other C++ shared libraries upon this one cannot have a > commitment level higher than Volatile either.
Braap. Bad Architecture Alert. The whole reason we provide abstractions like consolidations and components is precisely so that we can provide "higher than Volatile" expectations for things that theselves may exhibit "less than Volatile" stability. There is no reason this couldn't be made a part of the KDE consolidation, and maintained by them as Committed interfaces for use by any KDE consumers who need it. Volatile means "can change", not "will change", and both the Apache C++ Lib and the KDE projects certainly seem to meet the basic ARC expectations of managing the compatible evolution of their component. If the C++ basis that KDE builds upon were to change incompatibly, I'd expect KDE to react by producing a major release - again, just like the ARC would expect. Nothing here requires KDE to be Volatile. -John
