On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 06:50:16PM -0400, Andrew Stitcher wrote: > > > > What I was thinking was that, by moving the bindings out and then > > > > versioning the SWIG wrapper code we could build the individual language > > > > bindings separately rather than having to build all of Qpid to get them. > > > > I'm still not totally comfortable with the idea of versioning those > > > > wrappers. > > > > > > Could you explain what you mean by "versioning" in this context? > > > > Generating a copy of the SWIG wrapper for that language and then commit > > it in git. > > I don't think committing generated code to the repository is a good idea > (but I could be convinced). Why do want to do this?
The main takeaway would be that the language bindings would be build-independent of the C++ codebase; i.e., when you're working on them only, you wouldn't have to repeatedly rebuild the C++ code. -- Darryl L. Pierce, Sr. Software Engineer @ Red Hat, Inc. Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
pgpRZllAaOG5J.pgp
Description: PGP signature
