Christoph Egger wrote:
> > Yeah. If/when we move our CVS to SourceForge, the libggi2d
> > directory should be dropped. Actually, maybe we should use such a CVS
> > move to reorganize our whole CVS tree, which is now over three years old
> > and filled with cruft and deleted directories. We could split GGI/GII,
> > KGIcon, and each extension library off into their own separate SF
> > projects, to reduce the size of snapshots and such. I already did this
> > for LibGGI3D once upon a time....
>
> SF supports a module-concept. Just think of KGI-0.9: It has three
> modules: kgi-0.9, tools and html.
> We should do so for each extension as well as create a new task at SF
> for each extension.
exactly. It's basically about releases. I would think that as long as there
is a lot of interdependency the different parts should stay in the same project.
However, they could become separate modules in cvs, as well as separate packages
for releases.
On the other hand, I still think that stuff like a font renderer that only sits
on top of the GGI libs, or other higher level things such as widget bindings, are
better suited for a separate project. This keeps the goals more clean. I bet a
lot of people currently don't know exactly what GGI is all about. Having clear
goals presented on the home page as well as in the code layout will help people's
orientation.
Regards, Stefan
