On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 17:59:45 Ivan ÄukiÄ wrote: > > yes, i understand the problem. the question is whether it is worthwhile to > > break code that uses it. once we have a release that contains both SLC and > > libkactivities that includes this fix, then the problem goes away. so it's > > about the short term, really. > > So, you're for the current version of SLC with the current kactivities for > the reason of not breaking anything?
yes, and i appreciate your understanding here. > BTW, what is a policy (if there is one) for kde libraries to have macros > like #define SOMELIB_VERSION 134 > so that the users can test against which version they are being compiled? usually we ship a version.h. if you look at kdelibs/plasma/version.[h|cpp] you'll see a pretty standard version of this. (speaking of which, that version # is outdated. gah, forgot to change it for 4.10) -- Aaron J. Seigo
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
