On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 00:17, Bert Huijben <bert_at_vmoo.com> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Hyrum K. Wright [mailto:hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org]
>> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 10:26 PM
>> To: svn_at_subversion.tigris.org
>> Subject: svn commit: r35439 - in trunk/subversion/bindings/swig: .
>> python/libsvn_swig_py ruby/libsvn_swig_ruby
>>
>> Author: hwright
>> Date: Fri Jan 23 13:26:16 2009
>> New Revision: 35439
>>
>> Log:
>> Fix the swig bindings after r35424.
>>
>> * subversion/bindings/swig/core.i,
>> subversion/bindings/swig/svn_wc.i,
>> subversion/bindings/swig/svn_delta.i,
>> subversion/bindings/swig/svn_fs.i:
>> Include apr_md5.h in place of svn_md5.h.
>
> If this breaks our build, it probably breaks third party tools too?
>
> I like the idea of the public header cleanup, but I'm not sure if we can do
> this without breaking third party code.
>
>
> While it is not part of the ABI, the header files are certainly part of our
> public API.
I thought about that, and am somewhat torn. You're right in that a
source change is now needed ("add another #include"). But I'm also
thinking, "well... you used something from a header, and didn't
include it. fix the bug in your code."
All of our APIs and ABIs are the same. All that is changed is our
delivery of them to developers.
Thoughts?
(yes, it is a grey area)
Cheers,
-g
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1046451
Received on 2009-01-24 10:06:00 CET