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
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
