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

[Keith Packard]

On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 19:01 -0400, Kevin E Martin wrote:

> This is what I was trying to explain in the "Autotooling the modules"
> section of my devel notes.  The idea is that we will use as much of the
> autotooling from xlibs, xapps, xserver, and Debrix as possible.  I hope
> that we can use it all, which will get us close to where we want to be,
> but we should examine what has been done and ask those involved if they
> have figured out better ways to autotool the code since they did the
> work or if they have learned lessons that we should make sure not to
> repeat.  Basically, I don't want to recreate the wheel nor do I want to
> repeat the mistakes of the past.

Just so I don't forget before I leave tomorrow, there's one
inconsistency in the xlibs modularization effort which may deserve some
study.

Autotool packages often (but not always) place the actual sources for
the project one directory below the top so that the maze of build files
and other cruft doesn't clutter the directory containing the source
files.  Xlib was modularized this way while the remaining packages were
not.

I suggest that we'd best agree on whether we follow this convention or
not; my own opinion is that it's probably a good idea for larger
packages, and so we should probably just do it in all cases.

I note that some Gnome modules use the name of the module for this
subdirectory (gtk/gtk); I'd rather just use 'src' unless others have
compelling arguments in favor of the module name.

-keith

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-modular/attachments/20050414/cade5566/attachment.pgp