On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:18:11PM +0200, Alon Levy wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 05:00:10PM +0200, Alon Levy wrote: > > Hi All, > > Ok, take two with Gerd's and Hans's and Uri's comments. > > (1) spice-protocol - keep it, move code generation stuff here > (spice_codegen.py, python_modules, spice*.proto), and have the dist tarball > contain the cpp and c files resulting from running it. > > (2) spice-server - new repo from spice/server, will submodule common. will > keep requiring spice-protocol as a separate entity, and will reference the c > files therein (does this make any sense, carrying c files as installed files? > I can't think of any other outcome of moving the codegen to spice-protocol)
Installing generated C files on the system as part of spice-protocol, and referring these from spice-server looks really ugly to me. Another option would be to install the python code and the .proto file as part of spice-protocol and to use these system-wide tools to generate the .c files as we do already. This would only need minimal changes to the build system, and we could still ship the generated files as part of each project tarballs (a bit unusual, but why not). Another option could be to combine common and spice-protocol, and to build the generated files as part of this combination, but I don't know if it makes sense at all. Christophe
pgpAqp8axL1Yq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
