| 1 |
On 3.3.2010 11.23, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2010/3/3 Tomáš Chvátal <scarabeus@g.o>: |
| 3 |
>>>> Removing eclass functions like this is not allowed by current policy. If |
| 4 |
>>>> you want to do it, you should discuss about changing policy. |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> ?! |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>> since when? |
| 9 |
>>> |
| 10 |
>> Since ever. |
| 11 |
>> If you change eclass abi you need to rename it. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I think you can *add* functions and variables to eclasses, you can |
| 15 |
> change *how* a function works internally, you can *fix* problems with |
| 16 |
> functions (which would technically result in a change in API). I don't |
| 17 |
> think it has ever been as strict as, say, the kernel ABI interface. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Yes, eclasses go along the same lines as shared libraries, which is |
| 21 |
probably what Tomáš meant any way. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Regards, |
| 24 |
Petteri |
Archives