I'd vote for 2): I don't think there's much risk either and we've been testing these macros for a while now with xfdesktop, xfce4-notifyd and more recently xfce4-panel, at least.
Cheers, Gaël ------- Original Message ------- On Monday, October 16th, 2023 at 5:58 AM, Alex <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > thanks for the forward Brian! As well added Skunnyk and Andre. > > Personally I would go for the more conservative 1) to prevent possible > further trouble with them on the stable branch ... maybe with a comment to > swap them out for the xfce-4.20 official macros, once xfce4.20 is released. > > Though I did not look into the Makros in detail ... if you are sure that 2) > will be save / will not have side effects, it as well would be fine with it. > > Cheers, Alex > > Am 16.10.23 um 03:51 schrieb Brian Tarricone: > >> Gah, sorry about that, I didn't even think of the fact that distros would >> need the newer 4.19 dev-tools package for packaging. > > CC'd Alex; Alex, >> for some more context (some of it got snipped): we've started depending on >> some macros I added to xfce4-dev-tools in the 4.19.x series (the >> XDT_CHECK_OPTIONAL_FEATURE stuff), but in stable versions of things >> (xfce4-terminal, xfce4-notifyd). Turns out that's making things difficult >> for packagers. > > So I think we have two good options: > > 1) We can put >> the new m4 macros in a .m4 file, prefix them with something else so they >> don't conflict, and copy it into each project that uses them and wants to do >> stable releases for now. Then those modules can run against xfce4-dev-tools >> 4.18 again. > > 2) We can backport the new macros to the 4.18 branch of >> xfce4-dev-tools. Since they're just additions, I don't think there's much >> risk of problems. > > Ok ok, there's also 3) go back to manually listing out >> the dependencies in each configure.ac and gating X11/Wayland support on >> them. But I don't feel like doing that ;) > > Gaël, Alex, what do you think? >> Feel free to CC anyone else who should weigh in. Personally I think #2 is >> the easiest, especially as more non-core modules want to support Wayland and >> need compile-time support for it, but not sure putting new macros in the >> stable series of xfce4-dev-tools is ok to do. > > -brian > > On Sun, Oct 15, >> 2023, at 15:11, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > >> On Sun, 2023-10-15 at 21:08 +0000, Gaël Bonithon wrote: >>>>>> We have the same issue for xfce4-notifyd but then I assumed 0.9 was the >>>>>> development branch leading to a 0.10 release for Xfce 4.20. So we pushed >>>>>> it to >>>>>> experimental without too much fuss. >>>>> >>>>> Xfce4-notifyd 0.9.x are not dev versions as far as I know. >> >> Well that doesn't change the fact that we can't upload it to unstable now :) >>>>> >>>>>> Well, if you have it and it's sensible, yes sure. >>>>> >>>>> See the attached patch. Not all XDT_CHECK_OPTIONAL_FEATURE features are >>>>> reproduced, but it should be enough. And since it has a limited impact, it >>>>> should continue to apply until Xfce 4.20. >> >> Thanks, I'll try that and report back (also, no need to encrypt direct mail, >> since it's sent in cleartext to a mailing list anyway). >> >> Regards,
