----- Original Message ----- > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:04:19AM -0500, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > On 12/12/2014 04:25 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > >>> Meeting summary > > > >>> --------------- > > > >>> * Roll Call (geppetto, 17:01:37) > > > >>> > > > >>> * #476 Requesting copylib exemption for libgnome-volume-control > > > >>> (geppetto, 17:06:19) > > > >>> * ACTION: General agreement that it should be made at least a > > > >>> static > > > >>> lib. … hopefully a shared lib. eventually. (geppetto, 17:20:11) > > > >>> > > > >> Per the FPC decision that libgnome-volume-control is not an acceptable > > > >> copylib, and therefore it has to be packaged as a static lib and > > > >> packages using it modified to use it, some questions: > > > >> > > > >> 1. who should be performing the modification? > > > >> 2. presumably reviews of new packages depending on this would be > > > >> blocked > > > >> until such a static lib is available? > > > >> 3. presumably whereas legacy packages that have already gone in are > > > >> fine, we won't want to yank them > > > > > > > > That won't happen. > > > > > > > Presumably you're refering to #3 here? Or you're saying there won't be a > > > libgnome-volume-control static lib? > > > > The whole goal of using a git submodule is so that we don't offer to > > 3rd-parties > > a library, and so that we can change the API without any problems. Using a > > static > > library offers all the disadvantages and none of the advantages of using a > > git submodule. > Agreed, a static library is a waste of time. What about a normal > shared library? Do you think patches to do that would be accepted? How does a shared library solve any of those problems? -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
