Re: RFD: CVS or Arch?

[Andreas Rottmann]

Andy Wingo <address@hidden> writes:

> 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 :)
>
It is up already[0], and I think the dev-environ -> dev-environ.in change
went in[1] with your changes.

[0] http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-gtk-general/2004-02/msg00002.html
[1] http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-gtk-general/2004-02/msg00000.html

>> > 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 ;)
>
Well, then I'd prefer (gnome gw gtk) or (gnome g-wrapped gtk).

Andy
-- 
Andreas Rottmann         | address@hidden      | address@hidden | address@hidden
http://yi.org/rotty      | GnuPG Key: http://yi.org/rotty/gpg.asc
Fingerprint              | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219  F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62

Make free software, not war!