Oliver Tappe <zooey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ah, I didn't actually know (or simply forgot) that we planned/decided > on > backwards compatibility between alpha releases. > Doesn't this mean that any exposed structure/function-sig has been > locked down > when we released r1a1 and will stay locked until r1? Not really, at least we already had binary incompatibilities (for example, BJoystick in R1/alpha1 is not compatible with BeOS nor alpha2). I wouldn't consider binary compatibility beyond what BeOS delivers between the alphas a high priority, ie. it should be broken when there is a good reason to do so. Bye, Axel.