Merged proto package

[Peter Hutterer]

On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 03:40:40AM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2010-04-12 23:58, Keith Packard wrote:
> >Looks like comments on the xproto package have tapered off; I'll give
> >everyone another chance, but then I'll go ahead and create a new
> >xorg-level 'xproto' repository with the current bits.
> 
> I have a few outstanding questions:
> 
> 1) Right now we have a bunch of COPYING files in each proto
> subdirectory and there is no top-level COPYING.  Unfortunately each
> proto is under a slightly different license, so consolidating them
> may have to be along the lines of xserver/COPYING.
> 
> 2) Unless EvIE is truly returning for 1.9, 

Unless someone steps up to do it really soon, I don't see that happening.

Cheers,
  Peter

> I don't think that
> evieproto should be included.  We can always merge it in later
> (can't we?) but merging it in now just to split it out again later
> this year will wreak havoc with users and distributors.
> 
> In the meantime:
> 
> The following changes since commit d25b7205c7e867cb6fbb1181ce053765ecf752b8:
>   Yaakov Selkowitz (1):
>         Require macros-1.4 for XORG_INSTALL
> 
> are available in the git repository at:
> 
>   git://anongit.freedesktop.org/~yselkowitz/xproto master
> 
> Yaakov Selkowitz (2):
>       Add top-level README
>       Fix whitespace in AC_OUTPUT
> 
>  README       |   28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  configure.ac |    4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 README
> 
> >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.
> 
> Rehashing from IRC:
> 
> util/modular certainly not; nothing there is installed on the system
> or necessary for distros.
> 
> util/macros IMO also not; there have been more releases of macros
> then protos, so merging in macros would mean a longer configure run
> and installation of dozens of headers every time we add to or fix
> macros. There are also a very few packages which don't require even
> xproto, so this would change distros' deptrees slightly.  Also, from
> the technical POV, trying to *use* macros at the same time you're
> building it may be difficult.
>