Re: Things for unstable cycle

["Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak gnome org>]

On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Jens Georg <mail jensge org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> some things I'd like to (see) fixed in the upcoming unstable cycle:
>
> Further improve introspection support:
>
> Some issues I've experienced when playing with gupnp + gi + gjs:
>  - ServiceProxyAction needs to be boxed. this also affects Vala.
>   According to Luca Bruno (Lethalman) the current Vapi is rather
>   hackish and not guaranteed to work on further versions.
>  - All the non-varargs version of begin_action_* don't properly
>   introspect because the GError * argument is not the last one, making
>   g-i not marking it as throws (This could also be a g-i bug)

  Better be fixed in g-i, no?

> Bindability or usability from other toolkits: (Qt/"gupnpmm"):
>  - It would be great to have an abstract ResourceFactory or interface
>   which exports the functions from gupnp-resource-factory-private.h to
>   hook up more complex factory functions than the ones that create a
>   new GType (e.g. think of creating a new QUPnPResourceFactory that
>   allows you to create new QUPnPServiceProxys).

  Looking at these API/‌ABI break and the ones we had to do in every
minor release cycle, I think GUPnP API/ABI isn't as stable as we
thought it is. Because of that, we really should also version the
pkg-config files, our binaries and shared dir
(/usr/share/gupnp-tools-0.x) etc to allow for parallel install of
different gupnp minor releases.

-- 
Regards,

Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
FSF member#5124