1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> > Could it work to make automatic signatures of imported ABI, and |
3 |
> > simply compare signatures when a provider package is updated? |
4 |
> |
5 |
> No. |
6 |
|
7 |
Can you say why? |
8 |
|
9 |
|
10 |
> Also, can we stop using the term "ABI" in reference to this please? |
11 |
> It's misleading. Let's call them sub-slots instead. |
12 |
|
13 |
I think ABI fits well though? The situation is that A DEPENDs on B, |
14 |
and at some point B changes in a way that A must be rebuilt in order |
15 |
to run - right? |
16 |
|
17 |
The only reason that A wouldn't run anymore is that B's ABI changed? |
18 |
|
19 |
Slots and sub-slots seem to be PMS terms to model this situation? |
20 |
They could certainly be used to implement a solution, but perhaps |
21 |
it's wise not to insist on using them when merely exploring the |
22 |
problem? |
23 |
|
24 |
|
25 |
//Peter |