Re: Dumping gnome-smproxy in 2.14

[ghee teo <Ghee Teo Sun COM>]

Hi,

   Just to complete this thread, I have taken smproxy from gnome-2-10
branch and imported the code into gnome-smproxy on CVS for those
who may want to use it.

   Thanks!

-Ghee

Mark McLoughlin wrote:

> On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 15:22 +0100, ghee teo wrote:
>  
>
> > Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> >
> >    
> >
> > > Hi Ghee,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 11:51 +0100, ghee teo wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >      
> > >
> > > > (a) Create a new CVS module that just contains smproxy
> > > >   
> > > >
> > > >        
> > > 	I've no problem at all with you doing this.
> > >
> > > 	However, do note that you'll also need patches to make GNOME not get
> > > screwed up with gnome-smproxy - e.g. bugs #118063, #309506 and #147691.
> > >
> > >
> > >      
> >    First of all, let me clarify, this module will be be part of the GNOME
> > platform release, but it  is more there who needs it can take it. If those
> > bugs can be fixed it will be a place to putback to.   Meanwhile, these 
> > bugs can
> > be assigned against this module.
> >    I disgree with that above mentioned patches should be included as a 
> > prior
> > condition where this module is imported to CVS though. It is more likely 
> > that
> > fixing these bugs will involve changes to more than just smproxy.
> >    
>
> 	I'm really having trouble parsing those two paragraphs, so let me just
> clarify what I'm saying:
>
>  1) Go ahead and import the smproxy code into a new module
>
>  2) This won't be part of the GNOME release set
>
>  3) When you go to actually ship smproxy, you'll probably want to look
>     into fixing the problems above which smproxy cause. However, one of
>     the explicit reasons we're dropping smproxy is that it causes
>     problems like this. So, I wouldn't expect upstream to care about
>     the problems.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark.
>
>