Re: RFD: CVS or Arch?

[Andy Wingo]

On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 19:16, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> It would be good for dev-environ to work with separate build dirs
> anyway, IMHO.

It does in my local copy. Get the main archive up and running :)

> > For the record, this would be the time to decide on how our module
> > tree should really look. (gnome pango), (gnome gtk), (gnome source-view)
> > sound like fine names to me. Can we put all the g-wrap libs in a
> > separate namespace? (gnome gw gw-gtk) or (gnome g-wrapped gw-gtk) or
> > (gnome gw gtk) or something. Thoughts?
> >
> I think it should be possible, but I don't really see why we should do
> that, since they have prefixed gw- anyway.

Well, it's for aesthetic reasons when browsing a module tree. Also one
difference from the present situation is that we require a proper module
for each library, and we forbid (under pain of death) anyone to use just
a g-wrapped module. The only problem I see with the plan is that we want
the source tree to mimic the installed tree. I might do this change,
though, if I'm feeling rash one day ;)

> I thought rather about generating configure.in than the Makefile.am:s,

If you have multiple categories that have files in the same directories,
you still need to have Makefile.am magic happen. And when directories
are in or out, then SUBDIRS needs to change. Good luck, but don't make
it too complicated ;)

-- 
Andy Wingo <address@hidden>