 |
 |
Hi Brian. I stay not a philosopher. The difference is that right now that stuff reached production sites, a practical issue, so I wrote "I don't like it". I also think that the solution proposed by Andreas solves the problem very well. On 12/18/2018 01:12 PM, Brian P Bockelman wrote: > @ffurano <https://github.com/ffurano> - I don't understand the opposition to breaking the ABI. In #585 > <https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/issues/585>, I proposed making this API public in order to some sort of ABI stability for > users (such as the DPM plugins) and you wrote: > > I am definitely not a philosopher of ABI compatibility, and I have put those headers with the private ones exactly to have > more freedom, until the interface stabilizes, which can take quite some time. > > In that case, we broke the ABI for the 4.8.0 release to have more convenient access to the |XrdSecEntity|. So, everyone last > year had to recompile their plugins to upgrade to the 4.8.0 release (just as we would have them doing here). > > If we can no longer do fixes to clear oversights the API, why don't we mark it as public? > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/pull/879#issuecomment-448200108>, or mute the > thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFIaT6NsqIuW067ns7S3q2piIpMF-k5gks5u6NuwgaJpZM4ZR3iU>. > -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/pull/879#issuecomment-448211038 ######################################################################## 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