On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 17:54:39 +0100 Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4 July 2016 at 15:45, Quentin Glidic <sardemff7+wayl...@sardemff7.net>
> wrote:
> > On 04/07/2016 16:23, Emil Velikov wrote:
> >>
> >> Use the documented libweston-$major.so.0.$minor.$patch scheme.
> >>
> >> An (almost) identical one is used by GLIB, GTK{2,3}, QT5, json-glib and
> >> others.
> >>
> >> v2:
> >> - Use shorter variable names LIBWESTON_{MAJOR,MINOR...}
> >> - Correctly use -version-info.
> >> - Drop unneeded @LIBWESTON_VERSION_MAJOR@ additions.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@collabora.com>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> XXX:
> >> - Should we rename libweston{,-0}.pc.in ?
> >> - Drop the s/LIBWESTON_ABI_VERSION/LIBWESTON_MAJOR/ hunk ?
> >> - Keep the configure libweston_*_version variables shorter ?
> >> - Yes, the LT_VERSION_INFO hunk looks a bit nasty, yet this is what GTK
> >> is doing, once you unraver the 2-3 layers of variables. It works as
> >> expected though, and I'd imagine others are doing a similar trick.
> >>
> >> fixup! libweston: use new versioning scheme
> >
> >
> > Looks good. A bit hard to read but I thing you at least build-tested it. :-)
> >
> > I think you can drop the "v2" part in the commit message, btw.
> >
> I've noticed that other commits keep their revision history above the
> --- line, and thus is present in git log. So I take that it's a nice
> to have, but here it's just useless ?
Hi,
I would tend to err on too much information in the commit message
than too little, so I don't mind at all having the patch revision
log included. It might even answer some questions for a future git
archeologist.
Thanks,
pq
pgpmyduz1oycg.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
