 |
 |
On Wednesday, June 06, 2012 10:26:15 PM Andrew Hanushevsky wrote: > a) We create a shared library of utilities commonly used by plug-in > writers. It's pretty easy to see what they would be. This library is > managed just as we manage plugin interfaces, as follows: > > o All patch releases (i.e. x.y.<patch> maintain ABI compatability and do > not introduce any new features. > o We are allowed to introduce new features in a minor release (i.e., > x.<minor>.<patch>) as long as they keep ABI compatability. > o Major releases may require a recompilation and would only be included in > the next EPEL release. > > b) We make no gaurantees on interfaces in our private shared libraries. > If a plugin writer wants to use something there, they are on their own. > Hence, they would be versioned differently than the common utilities > library (i.e. its version would stay the same across patch and minor > releases). > c) We provide a distribution that people can use to over-ride what's in > EPEL if they choose to go that route. Yes! I think that this is exactly the way to go. Judgnig from our previous issues with libraries, the hard part will be to define what is private and what is not, and structure the libraries accordingly. Lukasz ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1