Le Wed, Jun 03, 2026 at 08:13:51PM +0200, Matthieu Herrb a écrit : > On Wed, Jun 03, 2026 at 07:28:40PM +0200, Volker Schlecht wrote: > > Hi, > > > > picking up the thread started by Robert Lillack, here is the diff I have > > been > > testing and which so far works fine here. > > > > Any thoughts? > > Is it really needed ? When we discussed with Landry it seemed that > most of the code we have in port already had 0.20 supprt in their > main/master branches, and that they do frequent enough releases for us > to wait until all consumers can be updated to a version with 0.20. > > But I'm not full opposed to see someone (as long as it's not me, as I > really lack time) maintain 2 versions in parallel. Upstream has > renamed things for that in 0.19 and my work (with much help from other > porters) to make a wlroot module also had that possibility in mind.
i think we dont have much choice and have to go this route, because as time will pass we'll have more and more consumers of wlroots, and some will have their own release cycle, we cant easily wait for all consumers to migrate to the latest etc, at some point some will stop being developed... so going this way is the right direction imo. thanks volker for picking that up, havent had much time lately. that also unblocks labwc/sway updates, the import of river, and the other compositors can stay on 0.19 until they released with 0.20 compat. portswise i had a quick look, the only thing im unsure about is +@conflict wlroots->=0.19,<0.20 +@conflict wlroots->=0.19v0,<0.20v0 why both ?
