> On Sep 21, 2018, at 11:56 AM, Tim Hudson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> What I was suggesting is that we don't need to break the current encoding at
> all.
Not changing the encoding has a downside.
* The bits that represent ABI stability would shift from the
2nd/3rd nibbles to just the first nibble.
* We lose the option of changing the encoding in the future unless
we start requiring 64-bit longs.
* We end up with 3 status nibbles, two of which some applications
may misinterpret as holding a patch level:
0x<M><NN><FF><SSS>UL
On the whole maintaining the current placement of the major number in
the encoding makes it less not more natural for holding the new semantic
versions in a backwards-compatible way.
I think I've said everything I have to say on this topic. So I'll stop
for now. I continue to support Richard's proposal, but with an epoch
smaller than 8.
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
openssl-project mailing list
[email protected]
https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project
