Thanks for the explanation. For an occasional developer like me, it sounds
like the better choice for now is still shr-unstable.
Regards,
Neil
------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Jansa <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 06:29:31
To: Neil Jerram<[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Shr-Devel] shr-core builders
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:07:38PM +0100, Neil Jerram wrote:
> Martin Jansa <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > In case you're already building shr-core...
>
> Do you recommend building in shr-core now, or in shr-unstable?
> (Assuming that one wants the bleeding edge.)
Both are quite similar wrt used versions, except shr-core tracks EFL
trunk.
If you want shr-u with EFL trunk you can merge few patches from
https://gitorious.org/shr/shr-experimental/commits/master
Otherwise it's similar (sometimes I upgrade something first in shr-u and
then in shr-c, sometimes it's vice versa, but I'm trying to keep them in
sync).
Problem I see with shr-core now, is that it's rebuilt quite often due to
changed shared state checksums
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00907.html
maybe too often if you just need to sometimes build something with
customizations. Also I'll be away from computers for almost whole Juny,
July and I don't know if someone will keep shr-core in sync (as I won't
be able to make it "default" before I leave..)
Regards,
--
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
Shr-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shr-project.org/mailman/listinfo/shr-devel
