[Spice-devel] [PATCH spice-common] RFC: add back codegen

[Christophe Fergeau]

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 12:21:38PM -0500, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> > > > Imho, if you go that road, we better merge spice-proto & common.
> > > 
> > > Having a small 'spice-protocol parsing' library is probably better than
> > > spice-common calling code generation scripts shipped by spice-protocol
> > > indeed. I don't think the canvas/ssl/... code currently in spice-common
> > > would make sense in spice-protocol though.
> > 
> > I don't follow your reasoning. spice-common is common code for various C
> > spice code. It doesn't matter if they also share ssl or canvas handling, or
> > does it?
> 
> I think what Christophe was trying to say is that canvas code surely
> should not be moved in spice-protocol.

Yes exactly.

> However IMHO spice-protocol files would make sense in spice-common
> repository.
> 
> I honestly won't dislike to have spice-protocol be just a package
> generated by spice-common code and spice-common a repository.
> That is removing spice-protocol repository and putting everything in
> spice-common.
> It would solve the manual copy of enums.h too.

Do you mean that 'make dist' in spice-common would generate a
spice-protocol tarball with the same content as today? I don't know how
hard to do this would be, but that's an interesting idea...
Might be a bit weird to have to clone spice-common and make install
there to build the QXL driver while having this as a spice-server
submodule at the same time.

Christophe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/attachments/20160310/6ef4c3d8/attachment.sig>