Modularization development notes [was Re: RFA sent to the ArchWG]

[Kevin E Martin]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 05:31:59PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Thursday 14 April 2005 17:21, Kevin E Martin wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 01:54:07PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> > > Kevin E Martin wrote:
> > > >> - xc/programs/cxpm
> > > >>  - xc/programs/sxpm
> > >
> > > Would these return to being part of the libXpm module, as
> > > they were before XFree86 pulled the XPM package into extras?
> >
> > That sounds like a good idea.
> >
> > Should we remove Xpm from the lib module as well and just include it
> > from the upstream source as a tarball?  Also, who is the upstream
> > maintainer?  It seems we've applied quite a few fixes but I wonder how
> > many of them have been pushed back upstream.
> 
> We are upstream.

That's what I was afraid of.

So, should we then integrate the code directly into the modular tree
into both lib and app?  Or, should we just keep it together in lib even
though cxpm and sxpm are apps?