Tom Lane wrote:
>Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes:
>
>
>>Are there any reasons why we shouldn't change the libname with every
>>release like for UNIX? I can't think of any, but you never know...
>>
>>
>
>Surely that cure is far worse than the disease. You'd be trading a
>might-break risk (app using new function will fail if used with old
>library) for a guaranteed-to-break risk (*every* app fails if used
>with *any* library version other than what it was built against).
>
>The Unix version of the idea is considerably more flexible than
>what would happen on Windows.
>
>
Different from Unix distros, win32 apps will always bring all their
required libraries with them, so it's totally under control of the
developer/packager. There's no such thing as prerequisite packages for
win32 installs, new lib names will *not* break other apps when installed
because older ones stay untouched.
Regards,
Andreas