Modularization mailing list and initial strawman proposal

[Kevin E Martin]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 08:53:35AM +0100, Egbert Eich wrote:
> There is a deeper problem hidden behind this:
>  we will have to face a problem that doesn't exist presently: 
> diverging names of options that do the same thing in different 
> packages.
> There is nothing worse than needing to set option '--foo' on package
> a but option '--bar' on package b to do exactly the same thing.
> Furthermore it makes the entire X.Org software set look inconsitent.
> To reduce the risc of this we should have an option registry and
> someone to keep track of option names.
> Furthermore we should have the policy that packages that are shipped
> in an official X.Org release should adhere to a certain set of rules.
> Using registered options to set a certain well known config switch
> and registering new options should be among them.

I think this is an excellent idea.  And, it's something that we need in
other areas today.  For example, there are various driver-specific
options that do the same thing but are named differently in different
drivers (e.g., see the recent thread on xorg at fdo on this topic).  It
would be nice to have a registry for developers to check before adding
new options whether they be for build options, driver options, etc.

BTW, I'm planning to update the proposal on Wednesday with several of
the suggestions that we've discussed over the past few weeks.  I'll
include Egbert's suggestion there.

Kevin