Re: profterm's eel usage ...

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

Jody Goldberg <jody gnome org> writes:
> 
> For the 2.1 cycle I would really like to get some agreement that we
> share a library.  Merging the user base and developing an active
> review process will only strengthen things.
>

I just had a thought about how to manage this.

What if all incoming items for the library have to be tagged with
their target stable library, and have to be approved by the
maintainers of the target library. Clearly the approval barrier is set
lower than the target lib, but will include "yes we would like a
solution in this category for the stable lib"

The rules for the staging lib are that _only_ stuff that is being
staged goes in there. If it's decided that a feature will not go in to
the target stable lib after all, then it comes out of the staging lib.

This ensures that we avoid the "dumping ground effect" that's been so
painful in other libraries. It also avoids maintenance-by-committee
since each piece of the staging lib has a clear owner - the maintainer
of the library that it makes sense for the feature to end up in.

So in essence the staging lib is a shared tool for maintainers of
platform libraries.

Another rule has to be that only platform libs can be dependencies of
the staging lib, probably. Since everything in the staging lib is
targetted for one of the platform libs.

And a ground guideline has to be that we are really serious about "no
compat guarantees" - if something turns out to be wrong, then it comes
out or gets changed, and people have to fix their apps.

Havoc