library versioning

[Jeff Franks]

Brian J. Tarricone wrote:

> hi all,
>
> i have an idea... not sure if it's worth the work, but i thought i'd 
> put it out there.  in light of all the problems with people upgrading, 
> and trying to use parallel stable and CVS, do we perhaps want to start 
> versioning the filenames of our libs a bit better?
>
> ideally, we'd be doing something like "libxfcegui-4.3.so", 
> "libxfceutil-4.3.so", etc. etc.  note that i took the "4" out of the 
> library names altogether, which i guess might be a bit lame to do at 
> this point, so we'd stick with the lameness of "libxfcegui4-4.3.so" 
> and "libxfce4util-4.3.so", etc.  or perhaps, since we're versioning 
> the .pc files as, e.g., "libxfcegui4-1.0.pc", we could just increment 
> the minor on that guy, and use that in the filename versioning as 
> well.  so we'd have, for the current CVS, libxfcegui4-1.3.pc and 
> libxfcegui4-1.3.so.  or something like that.
>
> benefits:
> 1) no more complaints about "undefined: xfce_builtin_license_GPL" and 
> the like.
> 2) no more complaints from people wanting to install both in parallel 
> (presumably, to different prefixes: i'm not advocating putting minor 
> version suffixes on the binaries too).
> 3) easier for us devs to have 4.2 and stable on our machines for 
> patching and bugfixing and testing and whatnot.
>
So Brian, getting back to your original email, has all the generated 
talk resulted in anything being decided, yet?

Concerned,
Jeff.