Nepomuk + kdelibs + BC

Michael Pyne mpyne at
Thu Jan 10 23:54:21 GMT 2008

On Thursday 10 January 2008, Allen Winter wrote:
> On Thursday 10 January 2008 04:07:44 Sebastian TrĂ¼g wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > is it ok for me to do a little binary comp breakage in kdelibs/nepomuk
> > for KDE 4.1. I want to change the API of some classes (which are so far
> > only used by me AFAIK) to match the general QT/KDE design, make them
> > faster and cleaner.
> >
> > Any objections for me to do that?
> Could you post a patch?
> How about  creating new methods and deprecating the old?

I don't like the idea of breaking BC.  But since Nepomuk is it's own .so it's 
at least something that packagers can work around by having a libnepomuk-40 
type package for KDE 4.0 applications.

How does changing all the return types affect source compatibility though?  
Can a one-off application written against 4.0.2 compile against 4.1?

 - Michael Pyne
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list