<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.26.0">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 14:02 +0200, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<TT><FONT COLOR="#1a1a1a">XCB util libraries. So, I think it would be better to just have a</FONT></TT><BR>
<TT><FONT COLOR="#1a1a1a">separate Git repository (such as util-common-m4) for AX_COMPARE_VERSION</FONT></TT><BR>
<TT><FONT COLOR="#1a1a1a">and this macro, which would be imported into the util* repositories as a</FONT></TT><BR>
<TT><FONT COLOR="#1a1a1a">Git submodule.</FONT></TT><BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
The name <TT><FONT COLOR="#1a1a1a">util-common-m4</FONT></TT> suggest it would be limited to macros. You may just as well<BR>
use this repo for any type of reusable code. This could be specific C routines, documentation<BR>
template (sytle sheet) common error messages, etc... Anything that is xcb reusable and very unlikely<BR>
to change over time. Set a .pc file for that repo so you can manage version and obtain path. <BR>
<BR>
Will the new repo be under the xcb path like xcb/util and the likes? Bottom line it would be helpful to have<BR>
an "xcb" string somewhere in the path or name to identify it as being related to xcb. <BR>
<BR>
These are just personal comments from an outsider...<BR>
<BR>
Gaetan
</BODY>
</HTML>