[Spice-devel] repository reorg
Hans de Goede
hdegoede at redhat.com
Thu Jun 23 03:35:06 PDT 2011
On 06/23/2011 12:18 PM, Alon Levy wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 05:00:10PM +0200, Alon Levy wrote:
>> Hi All,
> Ok, take two with Gerd's and Hans's and Uri's comments.
> (1) spice-protocol - keep it, move code generation stuff here
> (spice_codegen.py, python_modules, spice*.proto), and have the dist tarball
> contain the cpp and c files resulting from running it.
I think it would be best to only have qxldev + agent + controller headers here,
and have a real spice-common library which would also contain the .proto file,
generator and have compiled marshaller code end up inside the spice-common.so.0
file. IOW common would have anything common between the server and any client(s).
And the generated .so would contain both the render and the marshaller code, since
both sides will need these both.
> (2) spice-server - new repo from spice/server, will submodule common. will
> keep requiring spice-protocol as a separate entity, and will reference the c
> files therein (does this make any sense, carrying c files as installed files?
> I can't think of any other outcome of moving the codegen to spice-protocol)
See above, having a proper common for protocol + render stuff would avoid the
need for ugly hacks with installing C-files.
> (3) spice-client - this will be the spice-gtk repo (or is anyone in favor of
> keeping spice-gtk name?), and it will submodule common too.
> (4) common - submodule. easier to do cross changes with spice-server and spice-client,
> dist tarballs package it (for spice-client, spice-server).
I would rather see common become a proper lib..
More information about the Spice-devel