xc/programs considered harmful

[Egbert Eich]

Keith Packard writes:
 > 
 > Around 22 o'clock on Dec 17, Vladimir Dergachev wrote:
 > 
 > > This might provide an easy migration path - have xc as is, create new 
 > > modules pointing to individual components (Xserver, fonts, library. 
 > > programs) and gradually apply patches allowing components to build when 
 > > checked out by themselves.
 > 
 > Unfortunately, to create viable stand-alone packages, you have to move
 > individual files around within the tree which breaks the Imake build
 > system.  While it would be possible to both create a modular build
 > environment *and* maintain the monolithic build system using imake, it's a
 > tremendous additional burden on the development process, especially as that
 > would really need to guarantee perfect source and binary compatibility
 > independent of the build system across a wide variety of operating systems.
 > 
 > I don't believe we should waste people's time like this; we have few 
 > enough developers as it is to consider spending years fixing duplicate 
 > build systems.
 > 

While preseving the Imake build system in its entirety would be extremely
hard we need to maintain Imake for outside packages. Thefore this begs
the question if the Imake build structure cannot be preserved in those
parts where this is easily possible (like applications) at least until
our customers feel comfortable about the transition.

Egbert.