[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: The move to libgda 4.0



Denis Leroy wrote:
I've been investigating the move to libgda 3.99.8 (4.0 API) for Fedora 11. The 4.0 API is apparently stable now, and based on the F-11 release timeframe, upstream does recommend it. There's also a growing number of projects working with the 4.0 API already and I've received a request for this for an Anjuta plugin (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479298).

There are currently 4 packages that depend on the 3.0 API: glom, gnome-python2-extras, qof and gnumeric-plugins-extras. The port to 4.0 appears to be non-trivial (http://library.gnome.org/devel/libgda-4.0/3.99/migration-2.html). We can probably work out a patch for something like the gnumeric plugin, but I don't know how much work would be required to port gnome-python2-extras for example. Glom still uses the 3.0 API, but the 4.0 port is almost finished in SVN.

2 options here:

1. Wait for glom to release its 4.0 API port, ping upstream for other dependencies or work on patches. Not yet clear how much work is required for this.

2. Revive the compat-libgda package (currently a dead.package, we used to have it for the 2.0 API when 2.99 was packaged) for the 3.0 API and move libgda to 3.99. Would this require a new package review ?


Depends on if there is more then just a name change. Are libgda3 and libgda4 parallel installable (including their -devel) without requiring any hacks to libgda3 ? (We do not want to hack libgda4, as then we would need to carry those hacks for a potential long time).

If its just a rename a review is not needed IMHO.

I'm strongly leaning toward 2, mostly because of the uncertainty of option 1 plus the fact it will hold up other updates waiting for the 4.0 API and delay 4.0 API testing.


+1 for option 2

Regards,

Hans


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]