Modules created and initial files checked in

[Daniel Stone]

On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 01:11:53AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> Keith Packard wrote:
> >We would like to keep the library versions constant through multiple
> >X.org releases (especially across 6.9 and 7.0), so we can't base the
> >library versions on the X.org version
> >
> >The .so version number will not necessarily be the same across different
> >operating systems as it depends on both local convention and system
> >capabilities.  So, we can't base the library version on the .so version
> >number.
> 
> Both of these things make sense.  How about using pre-existing
> library versions where they exist (ie: libXft, libXrender,
> libkeithp*), and for libraries that have never had a version
> separate from the Xorg release, start their package version
> number at 1.0.  Since it's the first time such libraries will
> have had their own package, it kindof makes sense for it to
> start at 1.0.  The points you've brought up in the email, as
> well as in other parts of the thread I think show that the
> package version for most libraries is more or less an arbitrary
> choice, because there isn't any universal rule that seems to
> apply to them all in a clean way based on some pre-existing
> version of something.
> 
> Calling say, libX11-1.0.tar.gz or something thereabouts doesn't
> mean it's the first version of libX11 of course, just the first
> version of the libX11 modular library package.  I think this
> would work out fairly well.  Can anyone think of a real problem
> this would cause?

I think most of the major libraries have 6.x naming by precedent, and
that we should probably stick with that.  The versions in the xlibs
tree (a fair few of which I did) seem quite sensible to me.  I mainly
followed the Render(Proto)/Xrender convention of using the protocol
versioning: the Xv protocol might have had protocol version 2.2, and
the library would've been 2.2.1 for the first bugfix release, or
something.  I think this is far and away the most sensible thing to do.

> Perhaps we should make X11R7 have a primary goal of renaming all
> of the stock files to be completely lowercase, and outlaw mixed
> case completely.  ;o)
> 
> Ok, I'm being crazy now - but only 1/2 crazy.  ;o)

Sure, but getting rid of /etc/X11, /usr/lib/X11, et al, would be a
fantastic start.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-modular/attachments/20050511/0d744a51/attachment.pgp