On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:04:19AM -0500, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > On 12/12/2014 04:25 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > >>> Meeting summary > > >>> --------------- > > >>> * Roll Call (geppetto, 17:01:37) > > >>> > > >>> * #476 Requesting copylib exemption for libgnome-volume-control > > >>> (geppetto, 17:06:19) > > >>> * ACTION: General agreement that it should be made at least a static > > >>> lib. … hopefully a shared lib. eventually. (geppetto, 17:20:11) > > >>> > > >> Per the FPC decision that libgnome-volume-control is not an acceptable > > >> copylib, and therefore it has to be packaged as a static lib and > > >> packages using it modified to use it, some questions: > > >> > > >> 1. who should be performing the modification? > > >> 2. presumably reviews of new packages depending on this would be blocked > > >> until such a static lib is available? > > >> 3. presumably whereas legacy packages that have already gone in are > > >> fine, we won't want to yank them > > > > > > That won't happen. > > > > > Presumably you're refering to #3 here? Or you're saying there won't be a > > libgnome-volume-control static lib? > > The whole goal of using a git submodule is so that we don't offer to > 3rd-parties > a library, and so that we can change the API without any problems. Using a > static > library offers all the disadvantages and none of the advantages of using a > git submodule. Agreed, a static library is a waste of time. What about a normal shared library? Do you think patches to do that would be accepted?
Zbyszek -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
