Re: [odin-devel] [LONG] Broken (lib)vista copyright
On Friday 01 February 2008 18:06, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, Gert Wollny wrote:
> > I just tested Odin with vistaio, it compiles without problems, and the
> > vista-test runs through. (I had more trouble, getting it to find QT4 and
> > QWT5 on my Gentoo installation). The access to vista is very well
> > separated into one source file and the required configure tests.
>
> Sounds positive that Odin might work as well with "vista_gabi".
Yes, I am also confident that Odin will compile with any of the Vista forks
since it uses only the most basic functions of vista, namely those for file
import/export of scalar fields and those for getting/setting Vista
attributes.
Thies
> > In my code it is similar, plug-ins are created that don't export any
> > vista-dependencies to other modules.
> > For that reason, I couldn't care less, which version of vista makes it,
> > if only we can add some more data types that should be orthogonal to
> > everything else in the library, add the defines for declspec enabled on
> > MS Windows, and the build process can (alternatively) use cmake (which
> > would just add a bunch of CMakeLists.txt files).
> > BTW: I've heart KDE went cmake, so those guys should now have some
> > experience in building Debian packages by using it.
>
> Well, I have no reason to assume that cmake will cause unsolvable
> trouble - so just implement whatever makes your library more
> portable and we will see what might be necessary to build clean
> Debian packages from it.
>
> > I think, if a/the software goes public, it will be changed by people
> > (fixing bugs, adding features), and therefore, testing it "all over
> > again" is inevitable. Hence, in order to insure code integrity, I'd
> > suggest to release a set of automatic unit tests and test data alongside
> > with the code that reduces the testing to "make check/test".
>
> Very good idea and it might enhance the quality independently from
> all the fork issues.
>
> Looking foreward to see the confusion dissolving
>
> Andreas.
Reply to: