Re: Guile release planning

["Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com>]

2008/11/11 Linas Vepstas <linasvepstas@gmail.com>:
>
> Any ideas for binary compatibility for the "micro" revisions?

At our "upstream" level (i.e. not trying to solve all of the
distribution-level issues), I think the theory is that this is covered
by library interface numbering.  In other words, if a change in guile
causes the new libguile not to be compatible with the previous one,
libguile's revision number should be incremented.

> I recently discovered that a library compiled against 1.8.3
> would core dump when used with an application compiled
> against 1.8.5.

And I assume the actually loaded libguile was version 1.8.5?  So there
should have been something in the library saying that it needed 1.8.3,
which would have caused the link to fail.  Does the libtool scheme
cover this; I'm afraid I just don't know.

> The linux kernel got rid of the stable/unstable branch idea,
> and it's worked really really well. (the reasons why are
> widely documented) I'm for it.

Yes, I guess my suggestion is quite similar to what the kernel did.

Thanks,
   Neil