Re: Pango process_modules_file () module path

[Behdad Esfahbod <behdad behdad org>]

On 12-12-19 01:28 PM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> On 12-12-18 11:52 PM, John Ralls wrote:
>> What can we do to make it better still? Well, I think using XDG variables instead of private ones would be an improvement. Does all of this gyrating with text files listing the modules really get us anything, or would it be less trouble to just go to the modules directory and load everything in it? 
> 
> With HarfBuzz now in place, I'm thinking about completely removing the module
> machinery.  You know what?  Lets do it.  Who volunteers to rip out another
> 1000 lines?

We just need to make sure pangox-compat is updated to keep working.

I probably look into this during the holidays.  Nothing more relaxing than
ripping code out.

-- 
behdad
http://behdad.org/