On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Yang Tse wrote:
>> Yeah, that public ares_options struct certainly makes it a bit too easy to
>> break the ABI. It clearly seems we've already broken it so we better make
>> the best of the situation.
>
> Is this an implicit OK to commit the IPv6 servers patch and keep working
> from there?
I think we have two options:
A) Revert my commit from 1st of nov and do it differently to make the ABI
remain
B) Proceed with things and bump the ABI number
If we go route (A) we still have no good way to introduce and change things
now and in the future without constantly breaking the ABI so I don't like it.
If we go (B) I think we should also fix the reason why we so easily break the
ABI: the options struct handling.
I propose (B), but I'm of course also eager to hear what others think since
this will not only break ABI but quite possibly also introduce an API change.
-- / daniel.haxx.seReceived on 2008-11-27