> >I haven't separated out the targets for source distributions (doesn't
> >make much sense IMHO), but we will for binary ones. I'll see if I can
> >make a build system for RH rpm packages.
> the core library can be compiled independently of the targets, so
> there is no essential need for the targets to be in the same source
> distribution.
I didn't say it can't be done, but it just doesn't make sense. A quick check
says that a whole LibGGI tree is around 600k compressed.
Now when I pick out the autoconf stuff, which won't split well, but needs
to be duplicated for all targets, if you separate it, it amounts to
125k compressed ...
Considering that we have 49 sublibs (targets and renderers), that would give
an overhead of 6 Megabytes for a full separation. And even a more reasonable
approach that keeps some stuff grouped (like all memory renderers, all X
targets etc.) will quickly be the double size of a full LibGGI package.
Not to say, that some people - like me - will be annoyed as hell, if they
have to download about 50 files for a full set.
> from core lib makes the distribution cleaner,
Cleaner maybe (though it would be nonobvious to most users)
> lighter,
No. It will be considerably heavier, unless we sacrifice portability.
> easier to maintain,
Not really. If we really do internal changes - however small they are -
that need target adjustment, we are much better off to have everything in
one place. The "single entry point" change we did a few months ago would
still not be finished, if we had the stuff separated.
> regarding distributions, if you build rpm packages please consider
> building debian packages too. in this way you reach out almost
> everybody, including those who choose to use good distributions ;).
Of course. Though I think it would be best, if someone with a .deb based
system would make them. He can test them ...
CU, ANdy
--
= Andreas Beck | Email : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
