Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl> writes: > It's indeed not possible to make everybody happy, so the question is who > you do mind the least to make unhappy. > > If nothing changes packagers like me will be unhappy because they need > to reintroduce the virtual dependency for the unstable C++ ABI. > > C-only users will be unhappy about having to rebuild their code when the > only C++ ABI breaks. > > And you will be unhappy if you have to split the library. > > Bumping the SONAME for C++-only ABI breaks is the most correct solution > as long as its provided by the same library, and splitting the libraries > in GDAL 4 seems like the right thing to do. > > The choice is up to you.
I wasn't as crisp but I agree with all that. _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
