Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 72.22222% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 73.10%. Comparing base (fa20168) to head (df6d87e).
Report is 19 commits behind head on master.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2694      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   73.03%   73.10%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files         149      149              
  Lines       30531    30537       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits        22298    22325      +27     
+ Misses       8233     8212      -21     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

This should be labeled with api-break as changes it the fields in toxOptions.

This should be labeled with api-break as changes it the fields in toxOptions.

maybe, direct usage of the options struct is deprecated.

https://github.com/TokTok/c-toxcore/blob/master/toxcore/tox.h#L526-L527

The memory layout of this struct (size, alignment, and field order) is not part of the ABI.

https://github.com/TokTok/c-toxcore/blob/master/toxcore/tox.h#L526-L527

The memory layout of this struct (size, alignment, and field order) is not part of the ABI.

Adding getters and setters is a part of the ABI in semantic versionsing: #2702

https://github.com/TokTok/c-toxcore/blob/master/toxcore/tox.h#L526-L527

The memory layout of this struct (size, alignment, and field order) is not part of the ABI.

Adding getters and setters is a part of the ABI in semantic versionsing: #2702

Can you quote and link to a spec of semantic versioning that confirms this?

Adding getters and setters is a part of the ABI in semantic versionsing: #2702

Can you quote and link to a spec of semantic versioning that confirms this?

I've QAed Python for 2 of the biggest companies in the world, and they have coding standards that specify this sort of thing (in one of them I wrote the first draft for Python), but I can't cite their internal documents. In brief:

• 1. MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes,
• 2. MINOR version when you add functionality in a backwards compatible manner, and
• 3. PATCH version when you make backwards compatible bug fixes

Adding getters and setters is adding new funtionality, so must be in a new minor. I also know this is the case for the Python project from having submitted a module into the Python standard library: their developers all know the rules and follow them strictly.

You're "releasing" big aglomerations rarely (years) and features go in without notice or planning or discussion. I assume that this may be the reason the project has lost so many developers and GUIs.

I understand now where the confusion is. Let me clarify: in toxcore, we've decided to use semver without patch, and shifted the version right by 1 position: 0.major.minor, and we have no patch level releases. This is documented in tox.h.

That is, until we release 1.0.0, at which point it'll be semver with patch.

You're right - I missed that comment.

I approve the code changes, but why is the behavoir explained inverted. Why is dns_enabled explained by the not state?

Because it's enabled by default, and has been true forever, so I figured it would be clearer to existing client devs if we explain what happens if you disable it explicitly.

When this will be merged? I'm waiting for a long time