On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 09:12:39 -0700, Dan Nicholson <dbn.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Keith Packard <kei...@keithp.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 02:33:22 -0500, "Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" > > <yselkow...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > > >> 6) Please tell me you're not planning on releasing this package with the > >> name "proto". :-) > > > > Oh. Yeah, probably not the best name. 'xproto'? 'xprotocol'? > > Well, considering we already have 'xproto' as one of the individual > modules, it might make sense to go with 'xorg-proto'. That would be > nicely synced with 'xorg-server'.
Eric came up with an obvious solution here. We simply take over the existing 'xproto' package and start with that existing version number. It's not tied to any protocol visible number at all. I'll plan on bumping that to '7.1.0'. Seem reasonable? Then we switch the X server to depending only on that package with that version number. We can still install the other .pc files for backwards compatibility, but future changes would want to use only the xproto version number. -- keith.pack...@intel.com
pgpt6cbH7aJlg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
