Re: Splitting the repos...

Ethan Blanton <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gnome.gaim.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
David Woodhouse spake unto us the following wisdom:
> I'd note that Evolution has a similar split, between Evolution the GUI
> and Evolution-Data-Server the back end. It *theoretically* allows
> separate and parallel development. In practice it's a complete fiction.
> Evolution and EDS versions are released in lockstep and a given
> Evolution version will have a dependency on the *precisely* matching
> version of EDS, because no attempt is really made at maintaining a
> stable API/ABI and keeping track of when the dependencies needs to
> change.
> 
> There's a lot more to a *meaningful* split than just separating
> different directories out into different repositories, and it hasn't
> been clear from the rest of the discussion that this is *really* going
> to happen. Which makes me suspect that the split isn't going to be
> stunningly productive.

Agreed.  However, I think we can and would actually allow this split;
we have developed a fairly consistent practice of following useful
versioning and compatibility practices, and I see no reason for that
to end just because we restructure things.

I suspect major releases would indeed continue to be in lockstep.

> If we really *are* talking about separating out libpurple and other
> bits and letting them develop at their own pace though, then that seems
> reasonable. Just don't underestimate the work involved. And let's have
> a proper discussion about library and symbol versioning, etc.

We already do this.  We follow the usual versioning rules that a minor
release may contain new functionality but may not change or break
existing functionality, etc.

> I'd *strongly* suggest that we finally come into the 21st century and
> allow C99 structure initialisers in the protocol plugins though, if
> they're going to be developed out-of-step with libpurple. That whole
> "count the NULLs" crap from the 1990s is a constant pain and it
> *already* leads to problems, which are only going to get worse.

We already allow this.  I believe it is used in quite a few places in
our sources.  We have not pushed them everywhere, though, and most of
the in-tree prpls predate good C99 support.

We allow (and even encourage) much of C99.  We do not allow declaring
variables in the middle of a block of code, // comments, and a few
other things.

There may be some things that are problematic for Windows users, as
Microsoft hasn't yet discovered 1999.  I don't personally care about
this, but it may cause some users angst.

Ethan

_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://pidgin.im/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.