Keeping binary compatibility

[Lubos Lunak]

On Friday 01 of October 2010, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> On Friday 01 October 2010, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> >  Moreover, there seem to be cases where we simply don't seem to have
> > rules (or at least I couldn't find them).
>
> Where did you look for the rules? Did you read [1]?

 I've contributed to it. And the only mention there seems to be "In the KDE 
project, we will provide binary compatibility within the life-span of a major 
release for the core libraries (kdelibs kdepimlibs).", which is 
- insufficient
- not where your usual 3rd-party app developer will look

>
> > Do we have rules that say
> > more than "kdelibs is BC stable, we don't care about the rest"?
>
> Yes, kind of. See [1]

- saying what I said above

>
> > What's the status with e.g. kdeedu libs?
>
> No BC. See [1]

 There is a difference between "we don't keep BC" and "we break BC". The first 
is acceptable, the second is lame.

> >  Looking at how KDE provides various libraries leads to a number of
> > WTH questions, like:
> > - WTH is the ABI stability documented, besides kdelibs?
>
> See [1]

 Negative.

> [1]
> http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Binary_Compatibility_Issues_With_C++

-- 
 Lubos Lunak
 l.lunak at suse.cz