On 7/23/07, Aaron Spike <aaron@...749...> wrote:
Bryce Harrington wrote:
That said, I think if you wish to merge this branch into main, it would be wisest to make your code only relies on a released version of lib2geom (which may mean working to get a release of lib2geom.)
Such a requirement is going to force lib2geom to release new versions weekly or even more rapidly. :-) I think requiring a stable version of lib2geom for a release version of Inkscape is a great idea but at the current moment requiring a stable version of lib2geom for a development version of Inkscape is impractical at this point in its development. I'm pretty sure we could get a new stable release of lib2geom today if we needed it. But I imagine that stable release will soon be too old for Inkscape's needs. My vote is for merging and requiring a lib2geom from svn trunk and publishing and updating the minimum necessary revision in the wiki. The projects need to push each other right now. Perhaps in a month we will be ready to require a stable version of lib2geom.
Aaron Spike
I'd vote for the SVN import stuff, so lib2geom looks like another folder in the inkscape tree, then merge it into the inkscape build process. I dont think needing the SVN version of Lib2Geom for the SVN version of inkscape is inappropriate, if the guys had done the development of it in a folder in the inkscape tree we'd have had no problem calling the unstable code then, I dont see why them wanting to make it a library in its own right thats useful for non inkscape purposes too should change what we require in terms of stability / release level when we're still mid dev cycle. Its not like its a project we have no connection too... Agreed tho we want a release to freeze the state inline with our release.