Bug in documentation about how to update -version-info?

[Max Bowsher]

I sent the below to address@hidden, but it's been a month with no
response, so now I'm trying address@hidden instead:

Max Bowsher wrote:
> Looking at the documentation about how to update -version-info:
> 
>   1. Start with version information of `0:0:0' for each libtool library.
> 
>   2. Update the version information only immediately before a public
>      release of your software.  More frequent updates are unnecessary,
>      and only guarantee that the current interface number gets larger
>      faster.
> 
>   3. If the library source code has changed at all since the last
>      update, then increment REVISION (`C:R:A' becomes `C:r+1:A').
> 
>   4. If any interfaces have been added, removed, or changed since the
>      last update, increment CURRENT, and set REVISION to 0.
> 
>   5. If any interfaces have been added since the last public release,
>      then increment AGE.
> 
>   6. If any interfaces have been removed since the last public release,
>      then set AGE to 0.
> 
> I think there is a potentially misleading issue with the above:
> If an interface is *changed* that is essentially the same as removing
> the old interface and adding a new one which just happens to have the
> same name - therefore, I think point 6 should say "removed or changed",
> not just "removed".
> 
> 
> Whilst this documentation is being looked at, a secondary point:
> The terms "last update" and "last public release" are used
> interchangeably - I think it would be clearer to use "last public
> release" exclusively (i.e. in points 3 and 4, change "last update" to
> "last public release").
> 
> Max.

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature