IDE and libUrl

[Richard Gaskin]

Some time ago Dave Cragg wrote:

 >> The version of libUrl (1.1a3) currently being distributed with
 >> the Rev 2.5 beta (engine 2.6.1) is not backwards compatible with
 >> earlier engines. This is because of syntax added to support
 >> secure sockets in https URLs.

Can older versions of libURL be used with newer engines (without support 
for new features, of course)?

 >> I plan to make future updaters aware of the engine version, and
 >> install the appropriate version. However, this might not be
 >> enough to keep confusion away.
 >>
 >> I'm not sure if the plan is to release new MC IDEs with each engine
 >> release (if so, then there mau be no problem), but I'm guessing
 >> people are hoping to be able to use the same IDE over a range of
 >> engine releases. There could be problems if people swap engines
 >> about liberally without being sure to have an appropriate version
 >> of libUrl in place.
 >>
 >> I can't think of an easy way round this problem right now. But if
 >> anyone has any thoughts, please let me know.

I'd propose that we do with libURL what we did with the Standalone 
Builder:  have two versions included in the IDE, and use the version 
appropriate to the engine being used in that session.

Can anyone think of a downside to that?

For the sake of simplicity I like being able to use one IDE build across 
all versions of the engine from the time the IDE went open source going 
forward.  There may be a time when that goal is no longer supportable, 
but as long as it is I think it's worth doing.

Any downsides to the approach for libURL proposed here?

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Media Corporation
  Developer of WebMerge: Publish any database on any Web site
  ___________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com       http://www.FourthWorld.com