Evan Benn <evanb...@chromium.org> writes: > I think the first question is is the flashrom community happy to have > these bindings live inside the flashrom git repo? They could live in > their own separate repos, but keeping them with flashrom will make > keeping up with libflashrom API changes more straightforward.
I am more or less an outsider, but as a packager: I do not want the binding to be hooked into the main build system. Building flashrom is one thing, and I expect that to work pretty much everywhere. Building the rust bindings I expect to be not wanted by everyone who wants flashrom, to have heavier dependencies (rustc is beastly), and to have signficant portability problems. That's all fine, but if in the same release tarball there should be a way to cd to some subdir, and build, expecting that flashrom is already installed and using the installed headers and libs, and expecting a rust compiler. I don't care at all about upstream repo organization if the rust binding is its own release tarball. I'll observe that changes to libflashrom and changes to the bindings may not be connected. Given all of the above, I think it's better to have each language binding be a separate repo with separate release tarballs.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list -- flashrom@flashrom.org To unsubscribe send an email to flashrom-le...@flashrom.org
