On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 09:56:07 +0100 Vincent Torri <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 9:28 AM, David Seikel <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 08:59:41 +0100 Vincent Torri > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Carsten Haitzler > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 08:46:43 +0100 Vincent Torri > >> > <[email protected]> said: > >> > > >> >> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Carsten Haitzler > >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 07:41:49 +0100 Vincent Torri > >> >> > <[email protected]> said: > >> >> > > >> >> >> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Enlightenment SVN > >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> > Log: > >> >> >> > and work more on getting release in shape - version > >> >> >> > requirements. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > (god this is a pain in the butt) > >> >> >> > >> >> >> we must simplify all this (for future releases, as you did > >> >> >> all the work for the next one). > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I propose to put the dep version requirements in the "### > >> >> >> Needed information" part of configure (I've added such part > >> >> >> in some configure.ac, like in eina) > >> >> >> > >> >> >> You also should really consider using configure to modify the > >> >> >> *_VERSION_MINOR in the *.h files. It adds *.h.in files, but > >> >> >> you're sure you don't forget it and you'll have less things > >> >> >> to do. Especially now that the number of EFL that we release > >> >> >> is growing. That's the kind of feature we should use. I know > >> >> >> that you don't like that, but the release process must be > >> >> >> simplified. > >> >> > > >> >> > single efl tree will fix all of this. everything will get the > >> >> > same version... and they will end up all #including a common > >> >> > parent header etc. etc. :) 1 point for version :) > >> >> > >> >> same version ? what about eet ? So some (eio, etc...) will be > >> >> bumped directly to 1.3 or more ? > >> > > >> > yeah - probably will bump to 1.7 or something for everything. > >> > > >> > >> I know you are busy with the release, but if you can write a mail > >> with more precisions about what you want in that single tree (the > >> directories, etc...), i (and maybe others too) can begin to write > >> the infrastructure and the autotools > > > > There was quite a long thread about that end of last year called > > "new build tree for efl." I'll quote the beginning of it to help > > you find it. (In the middle of dinner, so no time to go search for > > it in the archives for you.) > > > > Message-Id: <[email protected]> > > > > 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/... > >> ... > > not enough. For example: > > efl/src/eina/include > efl/src/eina/lib > efl/src/eina/doc > > or > > efl/doc > efl/src/eina/include > efl/src/eina/lib > > or > > efl/doc > efl/src/include > efl/src/eina/lib > > or ... ? > > I want something more precise Did you read the thread? Might be more in there, or might not. -- A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF email is sponsosred by: Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
