splitting the server

[Daniel Stone]

On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 01:15:24PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Daniel Stone <daniel at freedesktop.org> wrote:
> > > Libraries don't always have to be .so's - an fixed API is not
> > > always necessary.
> > 
> > If you don't have a fixed API, then there's really no point.
> 
> API and ABI are different things. The API of course should be
> quite fixed, so at least within one minor release it remains
> stable - I can totally live with having to rebuild all the
> server packages. 
> 
> The reason why I want to split the server is to get the whole
> build process into smaller, distict parts. This makes partial
> (re)builds faster, reliable and easier to look through. 

We've reached the point now with modularisation where any further
splitting only increases the time needed to build.  Already autotools
takes up most of the build time (and no, I really don't care about your
hypothetical build system until it's actually capable of building the
whole tree, sorry), and having to spend more time with that and figuring
out dependencies is *not* the way to go.

The only thing I can see as being worthwhile for the server is to break
out the DIX from the DDXes, and even then, I'm very seriously
questioning whether it's worthwhile.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-modular/attachments/20060512/575c556e/attachment.pgp