xserver ABI freeze policy
aplattner at nvidia.com
Wed Apr 30 08:58:02 PDT 2014
On 04/30/2014 08:53 AM, Keith Packard wrote:
> Aaron Plattner <aplattner at nvidia.com> writes:
>> Either of these sounds fine to me. Having the "major bug fixes only"
>> date double as the ABI freeze date has a nice simplicity to it. That
>> window might be a tad short for us to try to target same-day support but
>> hopefully it's close enough for people.
> Let's plan on making an explicit ABI/API freeze one month after the end
> of the merge window.
> Do you end up generating some kind of summary of API/ABI changes that we
> could post soon after the end of the merge window so that we could
> explicitly review that before the API/ABI was frozen?
I usually just diff the old headers against the new ones and fix up
anything that affects our drivers, but I can try to put together a
>> Sounds good to me. Since I'm reverting the support changes in the
>> driver, I personally don't care whether the ABI number gets bumped to 18
>> or not: it's just some minor s/17/18/ in a few places if it does.
> I'll bump the ABI number to ensure that all drivers get rebuilt once we
> do change. We've got a 16-bit space of numbers to work with, which seems
> likely to be sufficient even for X.
Sounds good. I really hope I'm not still working on X when it gets to
ABI version 65535.0.
More information about the xorg-devel