Re: [Libcdio-devel] [RFC] New API iso9660_statv2_t as API/ABI compatible way to read files >= 4 GiB

[Pete Batard]

On 2018.07.08 14:52, Rocky Bernstein wrote:
> I hope I am reiterating something that is consistent with consensus
> opinion: the next release we go with the compatible ABI and Thomas'
> changes.

Well, I guess I wasn't clear enough then, as I disagree with this approach.

My vote is to *NOT* apply any multiextent changes until we are in the 
process of preparing a new major release, and then go for the much 
simpler ABI-breaking proposal (i.e. ditch Thomas' latest proposal and 
use mine instead, albeit possibly with Thomas' dynamic allocation 
changes, which I don't feel are warranted, as I tried to explain 
earlier, but that I don't see much harm in having if we really believe 
that people are going to use super large multiextent ISO-9660 on systems 
where they can't use anything but shared libcdio libraries).

In my view, Thomas' proposal is way too disruptive for both libcdio and 
its users, whereas, if we simply decide to wait until we feel that we 
have a good window for an ABI change, we can get something a lot less 
painful for everybody. I have a very strong feeling that, if we decide 
to go with integrating Thomas' latest proposal, it will come to bite 
both us and our users, and the cost/benefit ratio will not be in 
anyone's favour.

So my current vote is against integrating these changes, and instead go 
with the much simpler and therefore a lot less disruptive earlier 
proposal, that requires an ABI upgrade, even if that means _waiting_ 
months or years until we feel that the time is ripe to apply these changes.

But again, that is just my vote. If there is a majority leaning the 
other way, I am certainly not going to oppose the integration of Thomas' 
latest proposal.

Regards,

/Pete