Re: [STUMP] Making StumpWM more modular

[Quentin Stievenart]

I think that this is generally a good idea. Splitting up stumpwm
architecture in multiple, smaller packages that are still part of
stumpwm is certainly a good idea.

However, I see a minor problem when splitting packages into a
different projects (as for the keysyms): we should be careful that it
won't create compatibility problems if ever the library interface is
changed and stumpwm's source is not updated fast enough.

I guess that keeping stumpwm related libraries under the stumpwm
organization is the way to go to avoid this. Having a buildbot (or
travis-ci) being run on every commit of stumpwm and it's libraries
could also help.

On 17 September 2014 16:36, David Bjergaard <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> There's been some discussion on the issue tracker about repackaging some
> of the code in stumpwm to be more modular.  Some pieces are useful to
> other projects in the CL ecosystem, and others have a semantic
> difference from the rest of the core of stumpwm.
>
> In my short time as package maintainer, I've always appreciated the
> input from the community, so if you have strong opinions please give
> them here.
>
> You can catch up on some details of the discussion here:
> https://github.com/stumpwm/stumpwm/pull/146
> https://github.com/stumpwm/stumpwm/pull/125
>
> Cheers,
>
>     Dave
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stumpwm-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel