In reply to Andreas Beck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>I haven't separated out the targets for source distributions (doesn't
>make much sense IMHO), but we will for binary ones. I'll see if I can
>make a build system for RH rpm packages.
>
the core library can be compiled independently of the targets, so
there is no essential need for the targets to be in the same source
distribution.
managing targets in a non-centralized way is of course better. for
example, there could be a different maintainer for each different
target, each one releasing independently. i actually don't see any
advantage in not separating the distributions. the makefiles, for
example, are inherently independent but have to be tied together by
one makefile if the distribution includes everything. the "ggi
version" also should be completely independent from any "target
version," which clearly indicates that the two should be released
independently, and adds to the number of reasons distributions should
be separated. and having separate distributions doesn't prevent anyone
from making available a 'ggi-all.tar.gz' file. separating targets
from core lib makes the distribution cleaner, lighter, easier to
maintain, and is the right thing to do imho.
regarding distributions, if you build rpm packages please consider
building debian packages too. in this way you reach out almost
everybody, including those who choose to use good distributions ;).
--
Cesar Augusto Rorato Crusius __o __o __o __o __o
Stanford University _`\<, _`\<, _`\<, _`\<, _`\<,
e-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_)/(_)
www.stanford.edu/~crusius
o _ _ _
__o __o __o __o /\_ _ \\o (_)\__/o (_)
_`\<, _`\<, _`\<, _`\<, _>(_) (_)/<_ \_| \ _|/' \/
(_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_)/(_) (_) (_) (_) (_)' _\o_
He who sacrifices functionality for ease of use
Loses both and deserves neither
