The move to libgda 4.0
Denis Leroy
denis at poolshark.org
Fri Jan 16 17:00:23 UTC 2009
Hans de Goede wrote:
> 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).
They are parallel-installable, the ABI suffix is used everywhere,
including on the /usr/bin executables.
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list