Re: Final version, RFC release process
| From: | Pierre Joye | Date: | Wed, 01 Jun 2011 22:24:32 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Final version, RFC release process | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-52718@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote:
>> However, what you refer to is about internals API. We can (and did a
>> lot) break ABI between x.y and x.y+1 and should really avoid breaking API
>> (read: signatures, source compatibility) if possible.
>
> I think we need to clear it up in the RFC. My take:
>
> - Switch from talking about 'ABI' to 'extension API'
> - Divide the extension API into source-level and binary-level
> - For x.y+1, make it clear that there's no need to retain binary-level extension API, and
> that source-level extension API is a 'should' and not a 'must'.
On it, adding the reference to ABI/API definition as well.
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org