Re: XFree86 modularization

Owen Taylor <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.xfree86.forum
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 10:27, Egbert Eich wrote:

[...]

>  >  * The easy low hanging fruit for modularization is the apps
>  >    distributed with X. Separate distribution of xauth or
>  >    mkfontdir probably doesn't make sense, but I could imagine:
>  > 
>  >     xterm - separate
>  >     xedit - separate
>  >     xclock, xeyes, texteroids, ... - demos package
>  >     twm,xsm,xclipboard,xdm,xman,xmh ... - classic X desktop package 
>  > 
>  >    How splitty you want to get really depends on how many 
>  >    pieces you have people interested in maintaining separately.
> 
> Yes. In principle we could turn each app into a separate module.
> The build process would allow that. Also it would not be a problem
> to define these modules in CVS so that they can be checked out
> separately while still remaining in the directory structure.
> 
> With proper tagging one could then check out the full tree with
> the latest releases of each module or each module separately.
> 
> Modularization however will be more difficult for the servers. It would be
> useful to place different servers (Xnest, Xvfb, XFree86, XPrint ...)
> into separate modules however they share a lot of common code
> (ie the complete dix).

It's certainly conceivable to do have libdix, libmi, libfb; in
effect have a "X server development kit". And it would no-doubt 
make the code organization of the server easier to understand for a
casual hacker. 

Still, it seems like a lot of work for relatively low gain.

[...]

>  > 
>  >  * Release management becomes more of a coordination effort 
>  >    (do we have tarballs from everybody?) rather than one central
>  >    'cvs tag' 'cvs export'.
>  > 
> 
> Are you suggesting to split the tree into separate repositories?
> I don't think there is anything which we cannot do with proper
> tags/modules in one single CVS repository.

No, I'm suggesting multiple modules in a single repository; 
I'm simply suggesting that the hypothetical xeyes maintainer
would apply the XFREE86_5_6_0 tag when they felt that all
the necessary bugs were fixed, rather than making it something
that had to be done globally.

Regards,
                                      Owen
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.