Re: gnome-libs 2.0 proposal

[Elliot Lee <sopwith redhat com>]

On 7 Mar 2001, jacob berkman wrote:

> On 07 Mar 2001 07:30:47 -0500, Elliot Lee wrote:
> >
> > 3. WRT branches, the HEAD vs -1-0 thing is a mere technicality. You are
> > ultimately going to have to wind up with the new gnome-libs in HEAD,
>
> with this plan we get 3 toplevel modules, which changes this reasoning
> a bit.

Hmm, I didn't gather the "3 toplevel modules" from the "3 conceptual
pieces" idea. I don't think they should be split up as separate packages,
which would seem to be the only reason to make separate modules.

> but, not all that much since there will still need to be some cvs
> magic to get the -1-0 gnome-libs into HEAD.

And I would imagine that no matter what the final maintainance
arrangements are, it would be easier to do the merging before the
submodules were separated.

-- Elliot
The truth knocks on my door, and I say
"Go away. I'm looking for the truth"
...and so it goes away.




_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers