breaking BIC for new addon libs in minor releases (was: Re: Goals? How are we doing?)

[David Faure]

On Tuesday 06 May 2008, Tom Albers wrote:
> Op dinsdag 06 mei 2008 18:46 schreef u:
> > Am Dienstag, 6. Mai 2008, um 18:39 Uhr, schrieb Tom Albers:
> > > Op dinsdag 06 mei 2008 18:30 schreef u:
> > > > > I disagree. I think it is a must to be BC between minor releases.

Not for a rarely-used lib like one that kdeutils would provide, IMHO.

> > > > For me it would be more work,
> > > > as I would have development spanned between extragear/libs and kdeutils.
> > > > And it would add an additional (if only soft) dependency between modules.
> > >
> > > No, as long as you make releases from the library, it's is just another
> > > 'external' dependency. As long as it is not a cyclic dependency as we now
> > > face with libkipi, it is not a problem.
> > 
> > We misunderstand each other?
> > kdeutils/okteta would depend on extragear/libs/okteta. Now it does not.
> > Think of the packagers. And checkouts of KDE's repository.
> 
> No. it is perfectly fine for a kdeutils app to depend on a library. If that happens to live in kde's svn too, that's fine.
> It is up to you to keep the kdeutils app compilable to your latest release of the lib.

I disagree. There's stuff in extragear that needs the "base kde modules" (trunk/KDE/*),
so we shouldn't have the reverse dependency.
trunk/KDE can depend on kdesupport libs, but not on extragear libs - extragear is compiled
*after* trunk/KDE, otherwise we have a cyclic dependency.

-- 
David Faure, faure at kde.org, sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE,
Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).