Merged proto package

[Alan Coopersmith]

Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Alan Coopersmith
> <alan.coopersmith at oracle.com> wrote:
>> Keith Packard wrote:
>>> I've written some scripts that construct a merged proto package from the
>>> existing proto packages. They're not fancy, but do preserve the entire
>>> history of each sub package as they get merged in.
>>>
>>> Here's the merged package:
>>>
>>>       git clone git://people.freedesktop.org/home/keithp/proto.git
>> So this still has each proto get released as individual tarballs, just merges
>> the git repo?   What's the difference between this and the git super-module
>> Peter made?
> 
> I think we'd like to move to just releasing one single proto tarball.
> 
> Its quite insane at the moment to track them all.

That's what I thought was orignally proposed, but was confused since Keith's
repo still has a configure.ac in each proto subdir, and I missed that there
was also a top-level configure.ac & Makefile.am.

How would updating different protocols work - if xrandr & dri2 updates were
both in progress, then we couldn't have a stable version of either until both
were ready?  Or would we just force protocol development to live on branches
until it was ready to be frozen and merge to master?

And do we really need everything in the proto module?   xf86rushproto &
lg3dproto seem particularly pointless to include.   printproto seems like
it should stay separately available for those who still need to build libXp
for binary compatibility, but doesn't need to be in the main proto module
for everyone.

-- 
	-Alan Coopersmith-        alan.coopersmith at oracle.com
	 Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System