Re: 1.6.0: major soname version decremented?

[Rob Browning]

Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> writes:

> Yes, I know.  But 1.5.x has been stable for almost a year; that's what
> we've been using for LilyPond, and that's where (Cygwin compatibility)
> development was merged.

But as long as LilyPond didn't deploy a version publically using
1.5.X, then I wouldn't expect there to be a problem...

>> The reason for the decrement is that Thien-Thi asked that I add some
>> (libtool) "AGE" to the libraries and that seemed reasonable so I did.
>> This decremented the major number.
>
> Aahh, the wonders of libtool.  You're not telling me that libtool is
> in control, rather than the developers? ;-)

Nope.  I knew it would decrease the major number, I just didn't think
it would matter.  If this *is* in fact a big problem, please explain,
and we'll figure out what should be done about it.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C  64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD