Re: [AD] to prefix or not to prefix (sigh)

[Hein Zelle <hein@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Peter Wang wrote:

> * 4.0: The old, non-prefixed API.  Nicknamed the "old fart" branch.
> 	It will be maintained forever, i.e. it will _only_ receive bug
> 	fixes, so long as the fix itself doesn't break API/ABI
> 	compatibility.  {New ports might also come in here, as long as
> 	they don't break _anything_ in the existing ports}

I agree with this idea. I myself wouldn't add new ports to it as I
expect it will be more work than it gives benifit, but as long as it
doesn't break _anything_ it should be fine.

> * 5.0: The API will be the same as 4.0, but with prefixes.  It would
> 	be released "not long" after 4.0.  Consider this a stepping
> 	stone.  The schedule for this is to be decided, but I
> 	suggested about one month.  The CVS branch for this would be
> 	opened very soon after 4.0 (a week or so).

Agreed. I think I'd rather call it 4.2, but that is kind of a lame
point. Wasn't the convention to use the second number for api changes
and the major number only for major changes? Even though this is an
extensive change, I'd still name it an 'api' change as no
functionality has changed. I'd stick with 4.2, therefore.

This of course doesn't mean we couldn't keep a compatibility header
file (if it works well) with later versions, as long as it is purely
an add-on to 4.2 and doesn't break anything. 

> * 5.2: The prefixed API, with new features.  Once people are used to
> 	the new API, we would release this.  {Once this is out, 5.0
> 	will be in the same state as 4.0 (i.e. maintained but not
> 	developed), unless 5.2 provides some sort of 5.0 compatibility
> 	mode (then it would kill off 5.0).  Stuff like the 8-bit
> 	palette would go in here, rather than 5.0.  This may or may
> 	not become 'Grozilla.}

After 4.2 (fixed functionality with prefixes, around forever) I would
start a WIP series again until 5.0, or possibly with some in between
stable 4.? releases. I think the WIP system works well (frequent
releases with not too many changes), if we could incorporate it into
the even=stable, odd=unstable system that would be good. I guess
it would would be even=stable with several WIP's at the odd numbers in
between. 

I hereby politely but firmly request that the term 'grozilla' is
stricken from all records: it gives me the shivers. The concept also
gives me the shivers (If I remember a previous discussion about it
correctly), but that's for another thread. I'd like to keep the
discussion 'what features should allegro incorporate in the future'
separate from the version numbering scheme :-)

> Some people have said they don't think the prefixing would ever happen
> if 4.0 got released without prefixes, because people would scream
> about backward compatibility anytime somebody tried to introduce the
> prefixes.  That's why 4.0 will be "maintained forever".

I don't think there's a need to worry about that. You have a valid
point that it is nice to have the stable 4.0 release (which will be
around long) in both a nonprefixed and a prefixed version. I'm all for
it.

Hein Zelle

>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-<
 Hein Zelle                     hein@xxxxxxxxxx
	                        http://www.icce.rug.nl/~hein
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-<