DCOP interface in kicker broke compatibility?

[George Staikos]

On Wednesday 02 February 2005 12:42, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> > As George points out, a DCOP interface should be considered a published,
> > public API for which compatibility is required to be preserved. (I
> > remember KNotes' interface change, which even caused data loss in some
> > cases with applications still expecting the old interface).
>
> as this ends up putting the sort of restrictions usually associated with
> libraries only upon applications, i think this is a rather strict and not
> entirely useful position. i say this because suddenly application
> developers are required to consider interface compatability where they
> usually don't have to, which makes application development more laborious.

   I think the backwards compatibility of DCOP interfaces is more important 
than even binary compatibility of our libraries.  It's not like there are 
many real commercial, binary-only applications out there using kdelibs.  On 
the other hand, there are many scripts and tools using DCOP.  Changing the 
interface breaks those apps.

-- 
George Staikos
KDE Developer				http://www.kde.org/
Staikos Computing Services Inc.		http://www.staikos.net/