On 06/20/2012 03:24 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 16:05 -0400, Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 02:11:51PM -0400, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
The big benefit to this would be breaking the Cmake dependencies between
the bindings and the cpp build tree. We could build them independently,
which is a Good Thing (tm).
I don't think you are really breaking any dependencies by moving code
around are you? The bindings will still depend on the c++ code where
ever it lives in the tree.
What I was thinking was that, by moving the bindings out and then
versioning the SWIG wrapper code we could build the individual language
bindings separately rather than having to build all of Qpid to get them.
I'm still not totally comfortable with the idea of versioning those
wrappers.
Could you explain what you mean by "versioning" in this context?
I assume it is the wrapped equivalent of the client-library version.
This is probably more of a packaging concern than an API/code issue.
Andrew
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
