[Cabal] Contract change

Luke Schierer lschiere at users.sf.net
Thu Nov 9 00:09:44 EST 2006

On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 06:35:19PM -0800, Sean Egan wrote:
> On 11/8/06, Stu Tomlinson <stu at nosnilmot.com> wrote:
> >  - for the code changes that change namespaces can we do this with an
> > 'anonymous' username just so it's obvious from
> > annotate/blame/vcs_of_the_month_synonym that it was a mass change?
> >  - how about we add a task to provide a script to try to re-namespace
> > existing plugins as best we can? (for 3rd party plugins that have
> > already gone to great pains to keep up with the 2.0.0beta API changes)
> Let's discuss this. I don't think we should change namespaces. Nor
> does Ethan. Rlaager thinks we should. Richard's point I liked best is
> that it would be nice to have obvious completely different namespaces
> for purple and pigeon, to emphasize that split.
> Other than that, renamespacing just seems like way more trouble than it's worth.

If libpurple is namespaced appropriately, such that gtkgaim and
gaim-text and any other UI have some other namespace, most particularly
as we distribute them, then it would be easier to enforce the core/ui
split.  Just as it is clear that there should be no Gtk+ in the
libpurple code, it is, in parralel, easy to enforce because the gtk_
namespace shows up in patches.  So to having a non gaim_* namespace
would make gaim_* namespace (or pidgin_* or whatever) show up as
obviously not belonging.

this is somewhat redundant with rlaager's reasoning.  I'm essentially
just expressing my agreement.


More information about the Cabal mailing list