| 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 |
Archives