Re: Release 3.4.1

[Orion Poplawski]

On 04/06/2011 06:20 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:
> Instead of -release, we should be using -version-info
> CURRENT:REVISION:AGE as described in the libtool manual and increment
> these version tags as needed using the guidelines in the libtool
> manual.  Then we have a better way to track binary compatibility of
> the libraries.

Absolutely.

> Given that we don't have a stable published API I don't think that we
> should try to guarantee that any .oct file build for any release 3.4.x
> can be used with any other 3.4.x release because to do that means that
> we are not even allowed to add new public functions to the libraries.
> If we did have a published API for .oct file developers to use, then
> I'd be more willing to make this guarantee as well, at least for the
> API functions.  But we don't, so it seems quite restricting to require
> that we can't add functions to the libraries when fixing bugs.

Just to note that there is no need to bump the soname version when you 
are just adding functions as that does not break backwards 
compatibility.  You can express this as well with the proper 
incrementing of the various version numbers in the -version-info option.

--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division                    FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane                  address@hidden
Boulder, CO 80301              http://www.cora.nwra.com