Mir

Code review comment for lp:~alan-griffiths/mir/fix-1415321

  1. fix-1415321
  2. Merge into development-branch
Revision history for this message
Chris Halse Rogers (raof) wrote :

You don't need to bump the SONAME of mirclient-debug-extension.

Like kdub, I like explicitly listing the symbols for mircilent.

I don't think you need to bump mirclient SONAME? The only loss I can see is the symbols exposed purely for the tests and PrivateProtobuf, neither of which are public. abi-compliance-checker will complain, but will be wrong in this case.

I'm not wild about symbols shared between the server and the client being in mirclient - the event builders and the cursor names are used in both. Why shouldn't they be in mircommon?

review: Needs Information

« Back to merge proposal