Re: Release team perspective [Was: libgnomeprint* 1.116.x in 2.2]

[Chema Celorio <chema ximian com>]

On Wed, 2002-12-11 at 10:56, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <quote who="Havoc Pennington">
> 
> > > Not optional? That's a big pain then...
> > > 
> > > It makes it much harder for developers to target the 2.2 platform, given
> > > that they have to rely on their users having GNOME 2.2 (or RH8).
> > 
> > The whole point of redoing things with fontconfig is to get rid of the
> > broken impossible-to-maintain gnome-print-specific font configuration BS.
> > If you still maintain said BS as a fallback, you haven't gotten anywhere.
> 
> Sure, I think due to the quality of the 2.0 gnomeprint, we can just say
> "sorry everyone, there were no guarantees anyway, this lib gets breakage",
> and hope like hell that it can go in the developer platform for 2.4 or so.
> :-)

Gnome-print 1.116.x comes with a nicely worded poem at the end of
configure that goes something like this:

------
*** IMPORTANT *** 

This is unstable. DO NOT distribute any software based on it.
Most probably you program will neither compile nor run.
----

So no need to warn them again, they've been warned. (message-of-doom has
been removed from HEAD).

> ot at working "out of the tarball" we could perhaps give it some
> > loving in that area.
> 
> It's not *too* bad, at least with XFree86. I'll be checking in a quick guide
> for it onto the 2.1 start page soon.

Note that fontconfig is a tiny library only, as small as libraries get.
And it does /not/ require Xft. We have all the fontconfig deps in Gnome
2.0, except for expat which is widely distributed.

regards,
Chema