On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 03:40:40AM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > On 2010-04-12 23:58, Keith Packard wrote: > >Looks like comments on the xproto package have tapered off; I'll give > >everyone another chance, but then I'll go ahead and create a new > >xorg-level 'xproto' repository with the current bits. > > I have a few outstanding questions: > > 1) Right now we have a bunch of COPYING files in each proto > subdirectory and there is no top-level COPYING. Unfortunately each > proto is under a slightly different license, so consolidating them > may have to be along the lines of xserver/COPYING. > > 2) Unless EvIE is truly returning for 1.9,
Unless someone steps up to do it really soon, I don't see that happening. Cheers, Peter > I don't think that > evieproto should be included. We can always merge it in later > (can't we?) but merging it in now just to split it out again later > this year will wreak havoc with users and distributors. > > In the meantime: > > The following changes since commit d25b7205c7e867cb6fbb1181ce053765ecf752b8: > Yaakov Selkowitz (1): > Require macros-1.4 for XORG_INSTALL > > are available in the git repository at: > > git://anongit.freedesktop.org/~yselkowitz/xproto master > > Yaakov Selkowitz (2): > Add top-level README > Fix whitespace in AC_OUTPUT > > README | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > configure.ac | 4 ++-- > 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 README > > >Eric had an additional suggestion this afternoon -- would it be crazy to > >consider merging util/macros and/or util/modular into this package at > >some point? Again, with the goal of making it easier to build the server > >or drivers, this would further reduce the potential necessary upstream > >bits. > > Rehashing from IRC: > > util/modular certainly not; nothing there is installed on the system > or necessary for distros. > > util/macros IMO also not; there have been more releases of macros > then protos, so merging in macros would mean a longer configure run > and installation of dozens of headers every time we add to or fix > macros. There are also a very few packages which don't require even > xproto, so this would change distros' deptrees slightly. Also, from > the technical POV, trying to *use* macros at the same time you're > building it may be difficult. > _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
