Adding new modules to CVS and future modular releases

[Jim Gettys]

Jhbuild is/was in decent shape as of a couple months ago
(just before I got involved in OLPC, I added a lot of modules for it);
krh beat me to doing the basic set up of it.

It shouldn't take much work to have it build the release, if indeed it
doesn't already (Kristian may certainly have done so).
			- Jim


On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 08:10 -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 13:12 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> 
> > What rules do we want to use going forward?  
> 
> We've had several discussions about this in the past when it was all
> theoretical. I think the criteria we came up with then are still useful
> though; X.Org's 'release' should include the bits needed to use X within
> a modern operating system release, and I think ajax's cut point is just
> about right (if too low). 
> 
> That is, if it hasn't been changed in a long time because no-one is
> actually using it, we shouldn't ship it. Making this cut relatively deep
> at first will provide for some community feed-back pretty quickly after
> the release. We've got one big chance to dramatically reduce our
> workload; let's take advantage of it.
> 
> Even if we do get people to complain bitterly about missing xditview, we
> can offer to let them maintain it within X.Org CVS and let them perform
> releases separately from the main X.Org release. But, those decisions
> can only be made once we determine which pieces are useful to many
> people and yet not really part of our 'platform'.
>  
> >  Do we need set criteria or a
> > simple "Ask the release manager - if they think it's obvious, they say yes,
> > if not, they send on to xorg-modular or xorg-arch" ?   Do we want different
> > criteria for CVS hosting vs. including in the release?
> 
> Yeah, we've always said that CVS hosting and release are different
> beasts; the main reason being that it's easy to include/exclude things
> from CVS from the release but a pain to migrate projects to different
> CVS hosting.
> 
> >    Should we allow
> > anyone who wants to maintain one of the old X.org contrib programs to have
> > CVS space even if it's not something we'd formally consider part of the
> > rollup releases?
> 
> Of course, one thing we do want to make clear is that CVS *isn't* the
> same as the release any longer. I think we need to get some resources
> focused on creating a tractable version of jhbuild (or other) meta build
> system so building from CVS will be possible by mere mortals, and that
> this build will contain precisely what our release contains.
> 
> -keith
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xorg-arch mailing list
> xorg-arch at lists.x.org
> http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-arch