[Xcb] Next Release?

[Peter Harris]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2013-08-16 11:04, Uli Schlachter wrote:
> On 06.08.2013 19:55, Uli Schlachter wrote: [...]
>> Also, I just remembered that there is a bug against xcb-xkb: 
>> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51295
> 
> It seems like the general consensus here is that this can be
> ignored for now. I don't have any strong opinions about this,
> mostly because I have not much clue about xcb-xkb.

Yeah, the protocol description of the XKB event (singular) is buggy
(there are multiple <event>s).

I'd like to see an enum with all the XKB sub-event numbers in it, so
authors using libxcb/xkb have a chance to use constants that will stay
around, rather than the event #defines that will disappear once the
xml is fixed.

The rest of it will need to be fixed eventually. On the one hand, I
don't find it itches all that badly at the moment. Given that it
doesn't hurt libxcb (much), I'm happy to postpone the final fix for
now. On the other hand, I hate to enable xkb by default if there is a
known (potential) API breakage coming.

> There are also lots of new patches on the list (Thanks Daniel
> Martin and Ran Benita!). Of these, only "A few more XKB fixes"
> sounds important. The last patch of that series was NAK'd, the
> first two are fine to go in? 
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2013-August/008509.html

Yes.

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2013-August/008525.html

> And of course there are the branches that Daniel Martin prepared to
> make merging patches easier for the lazy of us. Sadly, I haven't
> had the time to look at this again. 
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2013-August/008527.html

Those branches look good to me. I'll be pulling/pushing them later
today unless there are objections (or someone beats me to it).

> [This is the time and place where you write a reply and list all
> the issues that I forgot about]
> 
> Cheers, Uli
> 
> P.S.: We want new libxcb and xcb-proto releases, right? We need
> libxcb to enable xcb-xkb by default and xcb-proto for lots of
> random fixes? Does this mean, that the new libxcb should depend on
> thw new xcb-proto release?

Yes, there are some changes to xcbgen since 1.8, so libxcb won't build
properly without the new xcb/proto.

> P.P.S: Are we aiming for libxcb 1.10 and xcb-proto 1.9? Or both
> 1.10 and proto skips 1.9? Or something completely different?

I'll leave that particular bikeshed for someone else to paint.

Peter Harris
- -- 
               Open Text Connectivity Solutions Group
Peter Harris                    http://connectivity.opentext.com/
Research and Development        Phone: +1 905 762 6001
pharris at opentext.com            Toll Free: 1 877 359 4866
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlIOUVMACgkQsbmxTd/lXefxmQCg2wQnsIFGDRnG0sKjby64I+hH
/n4AoNWm08wfqcWQ05mMLxbXEmLIhH/o
=Xbg4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----