[Xorg] CVS HEAD -- ftfuncs.c:931: error: structure has no membernamed `find_sbit_image'

[Egbert Eich]

Keith Packard writes:
 > 
 > Around 21 o'clock on Jul 30, Egbert Eich wrote:
 > 
 > > I remember discussing CVS policies however I don't remember that this
 > > has ever been a major issue in these discussions. You may see it as
 > > a corollary of what was discussed.
 > 
 > We certainly haven't come up with a completely concrete CVS policy yet.
 > It's nice to see minor issues like this one that we can use as examples of
 > how such a policy should work.  Instead of letting problems fester for a
 > week or more, it would be nice to see them addressed promptly and
 > decisively so that each user won't have to learn about the 'official
 > workaround'.

Agreed. 
The polices we have applied were decided in an ad-hoc fashion.
However I would like avoid that people who have tried to adhere to
these policies subsequently don't get the feeling that they 
are changing randomly and in favour of certain individuals.

I therefore had preferred if the problem was communicated to Chisato
explaining that the previous policy was flawed - especially since the 
solution is so simple.

 > 
 > The problem with 2.1.7 was that it was not ABI compatible with 2.1.6, so 
 > code compiled against 2.1.6 would run incorrectly against 2.1.7, and code 
 > compiled against 2.1.7 would not run at all against 2.1.6.
 > 
 > I don't know if this was completely clear during the 6.7.0 discussions 
 > though; the precise nature of the problem is complicated.

The same problem seems to arise with freetype 2.1.7 vs. freetype 2.1.8.
The versions don't seem to be binary compatible.

 > 
 > > I just don't like to see unequal treatment of groups that are not as vocal
 > > here as you and me and thus easily get ignored.
 > 
 > Yes, we need to respect the needs of all of our users and make informed
 > decisions about what the software does.  That's why we should work hard to
 > get this feature into the release for that group of people still stuck with
 > core-font based applications.
 > 
 > Getting a patch into the code which supports FreeType 2.1.7 seems like a
 > practical and non-discriminatory plan.
 > 

Right. I bet Chisato would have been happy to do this if we had
asked him right away. 
Now he feels like as if we wanted to drop his changes. After all,
this - rather small - change allows us to drop support for a second
truetype font renderer ;-)

Cheers,
	Egbert.