Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> skribis: > Now there is https://gitlab.com/jas/guile-gnutls created like this:
Great! > git clone https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls.git guile-gnutls > cd guile-gnutls/ > git-filter-repo --path configure.ac --path .gitignore --path > doc/.gitignore --path README.md --path doc/ --path guile/ --path > Makefile.am --path m4/guile.m4 --path NEWS > git remote add guile-gnutls [email protected]:jas/guile-gnutls.git > git push -u guile-gnutls --all > git push -u guile-gnutls --tags I wonder if we should omit NEWS as it blurs the history a bit, in which case we’d later add a new NEWS file. WDYT? > Is this a suitable base to start on? Maybe we can iterate a couple of > times to get a suitable setup, I think we should prune some more in > doc/ which according to git-filter-repo man pages should be done by > another run of it to prune the repository further. Getting a top-level > configure.ac and Makefile.am is a main work item here. Yes, in doc/ we only need gnutls-guile.texi, gnutls.texi (of which gnutls-guile.texi was extracted) and Makefile.am I think. > Is https://notabug.org/cwebber/guile-gcrypt a good template for a guile > language binding of a C library? Yes, except that Guile-Gcrypt uses the FFI (pure Scheme). > I prefer to put the manual in doc/ but otherwise it looks good. Agreed. > Compared to the above setup, we may want to rename guile/ into > gnutls/. Or move guile/ to the top level, but maybe that can be done in a later commit. > One we are happy with the git repo, I would like it to be at > gitlab.com/gnutls since then we get CI/CD build testing which I don't > think notabug offers? There should probably be a --path .gitlab-ci.yml > above too. Sounds good. > One question is about version numbers.. it should probably have its own > version number, right? Would starting at 0.0.0 be a problem for > packaging, or should we start with 3.7.8 (upstream gnutls version) and > then count upwards (separate from GnuTLS versions) from there? I > prefer starting with 0.0.0 and using semantic versioning from the > start. That’s a good question. I would tend to start at 1.0.0 (because it’s stable). However some distros, such as Debian, have a binary package called ‘guile-gnutls’ that’s currently at 3.7.x, so the version number may cause them trouble. I don’t know whether we should take that into consideration or leave it up to distros. WDYT? Ludo’. _______________________________________________ Gnutls-help mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnutls-help
