On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 14:45 +0100, Chen, Congwu wrote:
> >Can you move it to a separate branch? We might merge it for 0.9.1, as
> >part of providing a nicer API for external developers, whereas the EDS
> >enhancements wouldn't bring any benefits for 0.9.1 and thus are material
> >for 1.0.
> Ah, I will make it.
There's the "libsyncevo" branch now. I just had a look at it and have
some comments/questions.
Do we want to install header files in "/usr/include/syncevo" or
"/usr/include/syncevolution"? I suggested the later and still prefer the
full name instead of the shorthand.
If I read the last patch in that branch right, then EDS and glib header
files are now a hard dependency for using libsyncevolution
(syncevolution.pc.in: Requires: libedataserver-1.2 libebook-1.2
libecal-1.2 glib-2.0; #ifdefs removed from several header files). Is
that intentional or is the goal to change that again?
We can keep the config.h usage and the ifdefs in our header files. We
just have to be careful that we include config.h like this
#ifdef HAVE_CONFIG_H
# include <config.h>
#endif
and that none of the ifdefs affect structs that are part of the API.
For example, in EvolutionSmartPtr.h, "#ifdef HAVE_GLIB" only adds some
declarations. The header file can be used just fine by a client program
without those if it doesn't provide a config.h or doesn't use GLib
itself.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
