Re: Proposal on how to handle xorg include patches (WAS: Re: X Strike Force XOrg SVN commit: r28 - /)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Branden Robinson wrote:
| On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 12:35:20AM -0400, Michel Dänzer wrote:
|
|>I'm not sure this is really an issue at all. When a component moves to
|>its own module, it should have a more or less stable interface to other
|>modules. That interface should be preserved by any patches touching
|>several modules, so the parts for every module can really be considered
|>separate patches.
|>
|>Of course, I may be missing something or simply have a misconception
|>about how the modularization is supposed to work...
|
|
| I was initially skeptical, too, but Fabio wants to work on this and I
don't
| mind it.
|
| In any case, he can't help but develop some good experience with the XOrg
| tree, and that's a valuable thing to have.
|
| I'm not inclined to try and pass judgement on Fabio's approach being right
| or wrong until sarge releases.
|
I am indeed very interested in everybody opinion. It's not my toy.
If my approach has a wrong desing and i don't notice, i much rather to
know it now rather than later. True that it is still probably too early
to say but i won't kill people for expressing their ideas :-)
Fabio
- --
<user> fajita: step one
<fajita> Whatever the problem, step one is always to look in the error log.
<user> fajita: step two
<fajita> When in danger or in doubt, step two is to scream and shout.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFBdMxYhCzbekR3nhgRAu2xAJ4g2TAxFfBqUD5/iU0CqDh3A6Nn/gCgi+ii
v+YZsrWEtimvIPX0+uVTIKM=
=0B00
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: