On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 01:25:45PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:47:46AM +0200, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> > Hey,
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 09:38:36PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:31:55PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> > > > Triggered by
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=667683
> > > > ---
> > > > If this looks correct I'll have a look at libvirt-glib and
> > > > libvirt-gobject too.
> > >
> > > Doing this would break ABI. We should just make sure future symbols
> > > are added in the right place
> >
> > I thought that until we decide we'll attempt to be ABI stable, we'd be
> > raising the symbols version number before every release if there has been
> > any new symbols, thus breaking ABI. It seems this hasn't been done in a
> > while :-/
>
> So what about the attached patch. 0.0.8 didn't introduce new symbols yet
> so I went for 0.0.7.
I'd go for 0.0.8 since I hope to get my usb redir patch series which adds
new libvirt-gconfig symbols, and this way we won't forget to raise this
number ;) Or I can add a patch going from 0.0.7 to 0.0.8 in the series.
I think that would be best since we'd start tracking ABI changes this
way.
Cheers,
-- Guido