On 11-01-15 04:01 AM, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
Generally, I am worried that we are now making so many huge changes to
the codebase that all existing patches soon have to be written from
scratch. This is not cool.
Specifically, I do not see a good reason for this change. Compiling
parts of a codebase to a temporary library is quite normal practice,
and I like having the code available in a shallow structure.
- Per
I don't see how this is a bigger deal for patches than the c -> cpp
rename, it is more or less a rename plus a removal of the useless "lib/"
in the include directives, which shouldn't require rewriting a patch
from scratch.
Moving stuff from lib to src doesn't create a "deeper" structure, lib
and src have the same number of characters, so files will be at the same
depth no matter how you spin it.
If you're alluding to me moving the contents of src to src/warzone2100
(in the CMake branch) then let me make it clear that the purpose of this
thread of discussion was for the lib to src move *only*. I'm rather
indifferent about that change.
On 11-01-15 10:14 AM, Christian Ohm wrote:
On Saturday, 15 January 2011 at 1:18, Safety0ff wrote:
Hi all,
While working on a CMake build system I took the opportunity to move
the contents from lib to src.
I don't see what that gains us, to me it'll only lead to confusion between old
and new layout and breaking of existing patches/branches.
Somewhat loosely related, what would be good imo is a lib/3rdparty directory,
for all the third party code we include.
The rationale for this was:
1) It helped me to keep the build system rational without compiling
some of the parts into libraries (like the current system does.)
Even automake can build the whole Warzone without building separate libraries
(though it's not configured that way atm).
I put third party code in a top level 3rdparty directory in the CMake
branch, I didn't see a reason to put third party stuff in
lib/3rdparty/*, that just seems unnecessary hierarchy.
What I said does not imply that it was mandatory to build Warzone
without building separate libraries, what was meant is that doing so
kept things cleaner / more logical.
I am aware that autotools can do that too, but IIRC you lose certain
options (using separate build flags, IIRC).
On 11-01-15 10:32 AM, dak180 wrote:
Generally this is why I am in favor of using feature branches in personal forks
instead of patches; no mater the changes made they will still be able to be
rebased onto the apropreate branch (or merged if there has been a significant
change of contents).
Or you can use this if you have git patches:
http://developer.wz2100.net/wiki/GitTricks#Merginganoldpatch
_______________________________________________
Warzone-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
