[darcs-devel] Re: git, porcelain, darcs, and version 1.0
Bryan Larsen
bryan.larsen at gmail.com
Mon Jul 18 13:28:26 PDT 2005
>>Darcs and git work together to determine the minimal amount
>>that needs to go into libgit1.so.
>
>
> Hold on... Nobody is speaking about *binary* compatibility, it's
> source-level compatibility that we need. There is absolutely no
> reason to introduce the complexities of shared libraries into the
> picture.
>
Source level compatibility and stability is the big deal. Compared to
that, shared libraries are an implementation detail, in my opinion.
Sometimes those details get "interesting", but they are soluble.
I could care less whether you use libgit.a or a libgit.so. Just as long
as distros or anybody else can update their darcs if a major data-loss
bug is found in git. A recompile is acceptable. Dealing with the
addition of a parameter to index_fd() is not.
Bryan
More information about the darcs-devel
mailing list