Re: Privatizing 'linc' ...

[Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>]

<quote who="The Face of Sun Microsystems">

> > > So - as I'm working on completing ORBit2's threading support; I keep
> > > wondering why linc was made a public API when it was so half cocked.
> > > 
> > > 	I'd really rather like to privatise linc inside ORBit2;
> > 
> > It makes sense to me. I think it would have minimal impact.
> 
> It makes sense to me from a desktop point of view, but haven't we already
> made a guarantee of API/ABI compatibility since it's a platform library?
> Obviously I have no idea of the types of people using it, but I'm not sure
> if it right to just pull it back into ORBit2 until we get to some kind of
> major release.

Yeah, we can't "get rid" of linc in a 2.x timeframe due to our API and ABI
commitments in major release series. If linc was as 'broken' as gnomeprint*,
we could potentially do something with it, but... Surely it's not. :-)

I was under the impression that linc could be more widely useful if people
actually knew about it? (Is there a need for linc, gnet, libgtcpsocket,
etc., or can we get the functionality of the latter two into a platform lib
through linc at some stage?)

So, we need to keep linc public in the 2.x timeframe, even if it's
deprecated.

- Jeff

-- 
linux.conf.au 2004: Adelaide, Australia         http://lca2004.linux.org.au/
 
             http://www.xach.com/debian-users-are-beatniks.html