From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] config: remove RTE_NEXT_ABI
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2018 09:05:18 +0100
Message-ID: <6880912.l9NoFy8GUE@xps>
References: <20180307174422.118291-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
 John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>,
 Marko Kovacevic <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org,
 Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>,
 Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B3294C74
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  8 Mar 2018 09:05:45 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20180307174422.118291-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

07/03/2018 18:44, Ferruh Yigit:
> After experimental API process defined do we still need RTE_NEXT_ABI
> config and process which has similar targets?

They are different targets.
Experimental API is always enabled but may be avoided by applications.
Next ABI can be used to break ABI without notice and disabled to keep
old ABI compatibility. It is almost never used because it is preferred
to keep ABI compatibility with rte_compat macros, or wait a deprecation
period after notice.