On 13/07/17 08:51, Christopher Michael wrote: > On 07/12/2017 07:08 PM, Simon Lees wrote: >> >> >> On 13/07/17 01:59, Stephen Houston wrote: >>> Yep. Understand. Just figured I'd throw it out there since it will >>> need to >>> be backported to this release and others anyway... >>> >> >> Why? we only really backport bugfixes not new features. No one will run >> e22 with a older version of efl, > > Umm .. history says otherwise. People will try.... >
Thats why we have configure checks, when e21 was released we only supported efl 1.17 and later, 1.17 was the efl release at the time. There was then a bunch of wayland fixes in efl 1.18 and so the minimum for running e21 under wayland is efl 1.18. I didn't here any complaints about that. > so just bump the minimum efl >> requirement for e22 to 1.21, if e22 was going to be released in the next >> month or so there might be a case for including it in efl 1.20 now, > > E fallows it's own release schedule.,... > It does but we won't release e while it depends on unreleased efl features, keeping in mind that e generally has a decent length stability period and efl releases are every 3 months making sure this happens doesn't tend to cause issues. Given that e isn't ready for release yet (in my opinion anyway) leaving this feature till efl 1.21 and setting that as the current oldest supported version is fine. > but I >> don't think thats likely. >> > > Perhaps not...doesn't stop people from trying to run versions that are > not meant to work together... > But ./configure does do this and has been doing so for quite some time. > I believe Stefan's stance is that this could be considered a "new > feature"...one not tested by the majority of people, and therefore > cannot be certain that condensed code would be wiser... > > <quote> > I have nothing against the idea and getting rid of code duplication is a >>>> good goal as well > </qoute> > > My stance: > <quote> > I do not think we should start this now, so late > in the stabilization schedule. > </quote> > I agree here, it seems like a good feature for efl 1.21 and thats where it should be included and as we don't backport features only bugfixes that means that it will only be in efl 1.21 and later which means e22 will depend on efl 1.21 and later which is fine (its similar to what we did with e21) and to be honest when I put out a new stable release i'll only be testing it with the version of efl that was released around the same time as the e release. My point here was more if e needs this feature and e was going to be released really soon then there maybe a case to be made for including it in efl this late in the release cycle, but too the best of my knowledge e22 is not about to be released so its not a issue. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
