[fpc-pascal] Re: linux: shouldwehard-codeversionedorunversioned shared libraries in our apps?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Thu, 16 Aug 2012, Ludo Brands wrote:

>>
>> But if people want a point-and-click interface, we can always
>> make a new component: TSQLDBLibraryLoader or so. With a
>> property for the library name of each supported DB, so we
>> need only 1 component.
>>
>
> I understand you prefer the perfect solution instead of the easy 3 line
> solution most others have implemented and that appear to work very well for
> them in 99% of the cases. I'm just afraid this quest for the perfect
> solution will make that in 6-9 months nothing has changed and this same
> discussion will pop up again.

Well, first of all, I don't think something needs to be changed in the first place :)

So, if we must do something extra anyway, then I prefer it to be the 
correct solution, and not a shortcut.

If we didn't go for the correct solution but for the 'easy' solution, 
we wouldn't have had TSQLTransaction either, but would have implemented 
transaction control in the connection component, which probably also 
covers 99% of cases...

And let's not forget: if we choose a reasonable default library name, 
99% of all problems fall away by themselves, and the component will 
not be needed in the first place; Just for special cases will you need it.

Michael.