Re: Dumping gnome-smproxy in 2.14

[Mark McLoughlin <markmc redhat com>]

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.