Hi, On 11.05.2011 00:17, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
Hi Alexei and Jens,
On 05/11/2011 12:13 AM, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
[...] We can pass it as an extra argument to conjugateepvector(), in order to retain binary compatibility.
I'ld propose to fix it similar to the patch attached. [...]
Without the maintenance branch, what now?
That patch goes to some lenghts in order to retain binary compatibility. Should I bother or should I simplify it and bump the soname version?
don`t bother with binary compatibility!! Next release will be 1.6.0 and by convention people will (or have to) expect that if the minor number changes there might be an ABI breakage. And I'll make it a habit to announce ABI breaks in the release announcement, so no surprises. Regards Jens