Backwards compatibility
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- C
- Stars
- 2
- Forks
- 2
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Hi.
I wonder what the expected compatibility with json-c is. Should I always be able to use json-cwx in place of json-c?
If not, this becomes a problem with RPM auto-dependency generation and RPM's auto-provides/requires generators as this library "looks" to tools such as YUM/DNF to be json-c in a _repo-md_ YUM/DNF repository and will be selected when an RPM wants `libjson-c.so.2`.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No files or tests are identified. Start by reviewing the compatibility relationship between json-cwx and json-c, then examine how RPM auto-dependency and auto-provides/requires generation handles libjson-c.so.2. Done requires a clear compatibility and packaging decision.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- c
- Domain
- devops
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100