Quoting Peter Hutterer (2017-11-21 16:25:47) > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 03:28:20PM -0800, Dylan Baker wrote: > > Quoting Keith Packard (2017-11-21 12:51:24) > > > Adam Jackson <a...@nwnk.net> writes: > > > > > > > Also, git://people.freedesktop.org/~keithp/newproto appears to contain > > > > the script used to generate the merged repo. > > > > > > Right, that's probably more useful today. The trick was to get the > > > headers merged without losing any of the history. > > > > > > > I would be entirely in favor of merging the protocol header repos, > > > > fwiw. For that matter I'd be in favor of generating them from the xcb > > > > xml, but let's burn one bridge at a time. > > > > > > Who wants to take another run at this wall? > > > > > > -- > > > -keith > > > > Your script splits each proto into a subdirectory, does it really make > > sense to > > do that, or should the final proto package have everything together in the > > root? > > please no! if you merge all repos the history will be messy. With > subdirectories > at least you get a nice git log for each individual repo if you specify the > directory name. > > Cheers, > Peter
With that in mind, does it still makes sense to merge the meson conversions I've sent out, since the toplevel meson will likely simply be a bunch of `subdir()` calls? Dylan
signature.asc
Description: signature
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
