Development plan -- time to move forward

[Owen Taylor]

On Sun, 2005-04-24 at 04:01 +1000, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-04-23 at 02:48 -0400, Kevin E Martin wrote:
> > onolithic tree at all.
> > 
> > It just adds meaningless lines to every souce file in the monolithic
> > tree.  I agree that AM_CONFIG_HEADER is very useful for dependencies,
> > but is it an absolute requirement for the initial release given the
> > caveat that it will be added immediately following the initial release?
> 
> I think it's important enough to avoid dependency problems and avoid
> this change afterwards to get it done right now.
> 
> The changes are harmless to the monolithic tree, aside from a bit of
> patch churn.

Other than then you get the annoying and long-term useless:

#ifdef HAVE_CONFIG_H
#include <config.h>
#endif

Instead of the simpler and easier to read:

#include <config.h>

(Most instances of the HAVE_CONFIG_H #ifdef you see in packages are
completely pointless... deleting them is a good instinct to have.)

Until someone goes in and makes the difference between the trees that
you are trying to avoid. 

But I don't think it really matters ... any way of proceeding here
will work.

Regards,
						Owen

-------------- 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/20050423/eb009db9/attachment.pgp