2009/9/29 Alexander Neundorf <a.neundorf-w...@gmx.net>: > On Tuesday 29 September 2009, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Alexander Neundorf >> >> <a.neundorf-w...@gmx.net> wrote: >> > I guess we will with it, because I don't really see a difference between >> > source compatibility for C++ files and for CMake files. In both cases, if >> > it's broken, the package will not compile. >> >> Do we promise source compatibility for C++ files? I thought we only >> promised *binary* compatibility through KDE 4.x but not *source*. > > Didn't really find it for KDE now (except here: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KDE), but for Qt: > http://qt.gitorious.org/qt/pages/CodingConventions#Binary+and+Source+Compatibility
It's mentioned at http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/SVN_Commit_Policy#Code_review_by_other_developers and http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/CMake_and_Source_Compatibility (written by you :D) However, (I'm no expert, but) I can't think of a time where you could break source compatibility while keeping binary compatibility. Or at least it's strange to require one but not the other. -- Matt Williams http://milliams.com _______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
