Hello!
Julien Lavergne has written on Tuesday, 14 August, at 22:51:
>Le 08/09/2012 01:21 PM, Andrej N. Gritsenko a écrit :
>> I want opinions from all of you. What do you think? Do you have any
>> objections on that?
>IMO, it sounds too much effort and complexity for a very few advantages.
The main advantage is to help developers have it in default search
path (library already is in but headers are not). And anyway the way it
is now does not have any advantages unfortunately.
About too much effort - it will consist only of few lines changed. I
already made a package with this locally when I made my local tests since
I don't like idea to create configure file just to test something, it's
just overkill. ;-) So believe me, it is NOT too much effort.
>Usually, users have the stable version, or the unstable one (development
>version), but rarely both. And tweaking the way of building libfm is
>probably limited to the devs, which probably have already a modified
>version of the library on their system.
>It will also make the life of the packagers less nice, as we probably
>never want to ship 2 different versions of libfm in 1 release of a
>distribution.
As for packagers - you're completely right, you'll probably never
ship 2 different versions of development package (since package manager
would not allow install of 2 packages of the same name but different
versions) so nothing will be changed for you, it is the change only for
developers sake.
With best regards.
Andriy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Pcmanfm-develop mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pcmanfm-develop
