Re: [Evolution-hackers] Camel in evolution-data-server, a different proposal

[Philip Van Hoof <spam pvanhoof be>]

On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 16:30 +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 17:14 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:

> What advantages does being able to dist camel on its own have, over
> simply packaging it in a separate package like OpenEmbedded and Debian
> do:

It's cleaner in my opinion :-), and I can more easily create a tar.gz
release.

> Before you can dist it as a separate package you'll need to remove the
> use of libedataserver.  That might not be possible or realistic, so I'd
> attempt that first.

Or do all the libraries in evolution-data-server with their own
configure.ac?

> If you find large bits of code that are only used in camel and are
> currently in libedataserver, I'd propose moving them into camel:
> libedataserver could do with slimming down.

For example EMsgPort, is that used by something else but Camel?

-- 
Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend 
home: me at pvanhoof dot be 
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org 
work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be 
http://www.pvanhoof.be - http://www.x-tend.be