On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 12:32:00 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)
<[email protected]> wrote:

> ok - this 10 gazillion separate libraries is just not managable. we
> are going to make a single build and source tree for efl. that means
> core efl. that means 1 configure script for all. 1 base makefile
> tree. something like:
> 
> efl
> efl/src
> efl/src/evas/...
> efl/src/eina/...
> efl/src/edje/...
> ...
> 
> we will still produce multiple shared libs, but under 1 build tree. 1
> source tarball for it all. 1 configure script. 1 efl version. 1 doc
> tree. this will cover core efl. right now that means:
> 
> eina eet evas ecore embryo edje eeze efreet e_dbus
> evas_generic_loaders (evil - only compiled if on win32/ce)
> 
> later elementary will get added (eio, emotion too).

Will this mean that, for example my embedded project that only
uses eina eet evas ecore embryo edje, will have to get a lot bigger?  Or
can I easily choose the components I build and install, even if I have
to put up with a bigger source tarball?

So long as I still get to easily cut out the stuff my embedded project
does not require, like IMF and X support.  Though I don't see where
eeze, efreet, e_dbus, eio, emotion, or elementary would fit into my
upcoming big desktop app either.  Well, maybe emotion.

> some people will not like this. sorry. reality is that world is
> totally confused by EFL. we spend immense effort trying to educate
> the world where all it sees is "efl" not "evas + edje + ecore +...".
> the fact is we do releases as if it were a single efl. we may as well
> start doing it that way.

This I agree with.  I can see lots of arguments coming though.

> benefits:
> 
> 1. massively reduced release workload.

Great.

> 2. massively better documentation as it now will be a single document
> for all of efl nicely cross-referenced between each actual lib

Good, I had a problem in documenting the edje lua stuff, a lot of it
needed to reference evas and other libraries.  My doxygen skills are
limited, was not sure how to do that.

> 3. guaranteed synchronized release so we don't have to fine-tune
> check the "required versions of efl libs"
> 4. an actual release that resembles what the world thinks of us.
> 5. doesn't break any api or abi compatibility
> 6. a chance to start again with a simple single clean configure.ac
> and remove many of the myriad of options in efl that just cause
> problems and have little value

All good things.

> 7. makes much more sense to have a single tree when using something
> like git as we either would have a single cit repo that just copies
> svn (possible but not really using git properly) or we split into
> things like 1 git for e17, one for core efl, one for "misc" etc. and
> so merging into a single efl tree makes sense if we ever move to
> using git.

Personally I think it should still be split a little further.  eina eet
evas ecore embryo edje is good for embedded work that a frame buffer is
a good match for.  Not everything needs X or desktop stuff. The rest
could be "X desktop" and "toolkit".  You could use elementary without
needing anything other than eina eet evas ecore embryo edje for
instance.  Efreet and e_dbus I would put into "misc".  Not so sure
about eeze and eio, I'm not actually familar with them.

You'll get lots of people arguing the split though.

-- 
A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants
coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Systems Optimization Self Assessment
Improve efficiency and utilization of IT resources. Drive out cost and 
improve service delivery. Take 5 minutes to use this Systems Optimization 
Self Assessment. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51450054/
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to