Merged proto package

[Peter Hutterer]

On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 06:05:49AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Keith Packard <keithp at keithp.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 21:58:12 -0700, Keith Packard <keithp at keithp.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Eric had an additional suggestion this afternoon -- would it be crazy to
> >> consider merging util/macros and/or util/modular into this package at
> >> some point? Again, with the goal of making it easier to build the server
> >> or drivers, this would further reduce the potential necessary upstream
> >> bits.
> >
> > Yaakov commented on IRC that 'macros' is changing fairly quickly these
> > days, which would mean reving the unified package frequently. That seems
> > like a bad idea to me. Anyone else have an opinion?
> 
> Yeah, macros is really it's own beast. If you wanted to merge macros
> and modular, I'd be OK with that. Something I've wanted to do for a
> long time is put some minimal autotools into modular and release it
> with accurate module lists for the katamaris. The idea being that the
> the question "How do I try the new X.Org release?" is easy to answer

This is about the best use-case for git submodule that I've encountered so
far and I've used it quite extensively for 7.5 tinderboxing. It really
works nicely.

The only thing lacking from git is to adjust the build order, so we still
need to resort to the build script. If git could take e.g. the submodule
order for the builds then that'd be perfect (looked into that once but
didn't get round to doing it).

Cheers,
  Peter

> for people that are not distro packagers. Not that this would be the
> recommended way for people to use X, but I think there should be a
> reasonable way to try "vanilla" X like you can with the kernel.