Re: xmldocs.make and friends

[Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik Sun COM>]

On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:

> Having said all that, here's a big drawback that just occurred to me: it
> won't work. Basically, if we ever break backwards compatibility in the
> common xmldocs.make, we would need to tag gnome-common and say that
> version X of foo-docs requires version Y of gnome-common. This is going
> to be really icky when building older packages. Other solutions I can
> think of that don't involve branching gnome-common (or gnome-docs-common
> -- it's not tied to the location of the common script) are similarly
> awkward. James, do you have any bright ideas about how to get around
> this one? ... my brain is full and refuses to cooperate at the moment.
> 

I don't think we can make any promises about compat anytime soon, which is
why we should use a separate, easily versionable module. And stagger the
moverover to using it. We don't want to be the culprits who are keeping
people from dogfooding (there isnt enough of that anyways)

> Hmm .. so that was two good points and one show stopper. Probably a net
> minus. :-(
> 
> Malcolm
> 

	Sander

	This is the place where all
	the junkies go	
	where time gets fast
	but everything gets slow