[Guy Harris <gharris@xxxxxxxxx>]

Michael Cohen wrote:

>   I think that having a proper libethereal opens ethereal to huge
>   possibilities

Of course, it also *reduces* some possibilities, such as the possibility 
of making major API changes.  I don't think we know enough yet to know 
what the right API for libethereal to export is, either to users of the 
library *or* to subdissectors (and I do know of at least some places 
where I think the current API should be changed).

>   I appreciate that Guy mentioned that the API is still evolving. I
>   think this is a chicken and egg problem - if people were able to link
>   against libethereal, their requirements would influence the API in
>   ways the original design did not anticipate.

Yes - as long as we get to tell those people "too bad" if they complain 
that an API change we make breaks their application, and they get to do 
nothing more than live with being told "too bad" and having to change 
their application.

Note that, at this point, "evolve" doesn't just mean "add new APIs", it 
also means "change existing APIs in incompatible fashions".