[sane-devel] Sane Release 1.1.0 ?
m. allan noah
kitno455 at gmail.com
Thu Nov 6 17:18:11 UTC 2008
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Julien BLACHE <jb at jblache.org> wrote:
> "m. allan noah" <kitno455 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> My biggest concerns are those raised by Olaf- how do the two versions
>> coexist. I will bet you that the solution we come up with will be
>> EXACTLY the same, whether we add your new function or not. So, i want
> No, if we go and add an optional status function, this problem does
> not exist. I covered that in my mail.
> If we go that route and do a 1.1, the dll backend can load *.so.1* and
> be done with it. If it's a 1.1 backend, it will have the function
> defined, nothing more to do, if it's a 1.0 backend it won't have it
> and dll wires up a stub instead. All backends in 1.1 define the
> function, a stub is used for all the backends that are unmaintained
> There, done, no problem. Total backward compatibility with anything
> built against 1.0. No change in the behaviour of the current API
> calls. Some work to do on saned/net as the new call needs to added and
> the version check needs to be extended a bit (1.1 client cannot talk
> to a 1.0 saned or needs to wire up a stub call for the new call). No
> big issue, takes time and testing.
but- as you have said several times in this thread, what about
frontends that link to the backend, bypassing dll? They might get a
frame-type they have never heard of, all while the backend says it
follows major version 1, which the standard says will never happen.
"The truth is an offense, but not a sin"
More information about the sane-devel