Re: [STUMP] Making StumpWM more modular

Quentin Stievenart <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.window-managers.stumpwm.devel
Message-ID <CACVumjAxhWv8XKd1B63OozJewnTRS7zkGeGCa3qS0pdu=nA-Hw@mail.gmail.com>
I think that this is generally a good idea. Splitting up stumpwm
architecture in multiple, smaller packages that are still part of
stumpwm is certainly a good idea.

However, I see a minor problem when splitting packages into a
different projects (as for the keysyms): we should be careful that it
won't create compatibility problems if ever the library interface is
changed and stumpwm's source is not updated fast enough.

I guess that keeping stumpwm related libraries under the stumpwm
organization is the way to go to avoid this. Having a buildbot (or
travis-ci) being run on every commit of stumpwm and it's libraries
could also help.

On 17 September 2014 16:36, David Bjergaard <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> There's been some discussion on the issue tracker about repackaging some
> of the code in stumpwm to be more modular.  Some pieces are useful to
> other projects in the CL ecosystem, and others have a semantic
> difference from the rest of the core of stumpwm.
>
> In my short time as package maintainer, I've always appreciated the
> input from the community, so if you have strong opinions please give
> them here.
>
> You can catch up on some details of the discussion here:
> https://github.com/stumpwm/stumpwm/pull/146
> https://github.com/stumpwm/stumpwm/pull/125
>
> Cheers,
>
>     Dave
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stumpwm-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-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.