RE: [ft-devel] Freetype library for LSB

[Banginwar, Rajesh]

> 
> > The most important aspect for the LSB is the ABI stability. What
does
> > this community think on this aspect?
> 
> Basically, the ABI is stable.  There are some glitches under the hood
> because applications use FreeType's internal functions which cause
> binary incompatibilities, but we are going to fix this -- this is,
> David Turner has already written and submitted patches for some
> important programs, and the next major FreeType release no longer will
> install the internal header functions.

So, are there any plans for next major release in near future? Will the
ABI change other than hiding these internal functions?

> 
> Note that I'm not a .dll and .so guru, and maybe others can answer
> that better (David is on vacation right now).

One of the things we need to worry about in LSB, is identifying the
right set of ABI. We need to make sure the part of the library that is
not stable (relatively) is excluded from standardization. 

Another issue specific to freetype is the licensing. I believe there are
parts of library functionality covered by Apple license. Can you please
shade some light on that?

> 
> > Some of the additional requirements that we have include: available
> > API documentation,
> 
> It's fully documented (with the help of a python script which converts
> source comments to HTML).
> 
> > a test suite to test the runtime (if this does not exist or is
> > incomplete, LSB can help) etc.
> 
> Aah, this is good to know!  We currently don't have a test suite, and
> we welcome volunteers.

Yes, we can certainly identify some resources to look at this problem,
thought we prefer to existing test suites if available. How does the
testing happen today? Is it possible to develop test suites for this
library using TET like framework? Any past freetype projects in test
domain which we can leverage?


Thanks,

-Rajesh