On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 07:43:12PM +0100, Nick Lamb <njl98r@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> * Can you 100% guarantee that Gtk+ HEAD builds and runs?
> If not, every time it's red we stall work on Gimp. That's no good.
There is cvs, so knowledge about "HEAD doesn't work, try last week's version"
will spread soon through developer circles. I think that the work of porting
now is less than the work of porting after a release IF the head version
really is as stable as Michael says. I take his word for that ;)
> * Can you 100% guarantee that APIs are frozen?
Of couse not, not even with gtk-1.2.
> How about ABIs?
Get broken all the time. Sidenote: To make confusion worse, neither gimp
nor gtk (nor glib AFAICS) use proper version numbers. Instead of encoding
the ABI version (as is common standard with ELF) they all just encode
their "public" version number, which is useless with respect to ABI
changes.
> If not we have to screen out errors caused by mis-matched versions on
> a daily basis just as some projects did during 1.1.x. It is painful.
Hmmm...
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg@xxxxxxxx |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
