On 2016-03-08 13:11, Marc Espie wrote:
On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 04:18:16PM +0000, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
On 2016-03-08, Josh Grosse <j...@jggimi.homeip.net> wrote:
> Thank you, naddy, for your kind patience with my port update. This one in
> particular has been a learning experience, and I appreciate the guidance.
That port is awfully complex. I keep wavering between wanting to
split off the Qt client into a separate port to simplify things,
and keeping the port as is just because it makes a good example.
Can you build the qt client separately in a simple enough way to not
have lots of patches duplication ?
If the -qt subpackage is split into its own port, it needs to build
-main
in order to link needed objects. If I'm right, then this doesn't seem
a worthwhile separation. But, due to the large set of corrections
that Vadim, Naddy, and Antoine needed to make to my port update OK for
commit, it is safest to assume I'm wrong. :)
I've had a look, it's not that awful, but then I'm biased, considering
what "complex" was in the past...
