[Geany-devel] Geany-Plugins Dependency Consolidation

[Frank Lanitz]

On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 05:27:08 -0700
Matthew Brush <mbrush at codebrainz.ca> wrote:

> On 12-08-05 04:47 AM, Frank Lanitz wrote:
> > On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 10:21:04 +1000
> > Lex Trotman <elextr at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 5 August 2012 03:40, Matthew Brush <mbrush at codebrainz.ca> wrote:
> >>> On 12-08-04 09:41 AM, Colomban Wendling wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>
> >>>> So... maybe I got your point wrong, but I don't think it's any
> >>>> kind of a problem to have different dependencies from one plugin
> >>>> to another -- actually, I think each plugin should set it
> >>>> dependencies to exactly what it needs: nothing less (of course),
> >>>> and nothing more.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> You got it mostly. I just mean some way for the build system to
> >>> handle multiple plugins sharing same dependencies like having
> >>> webkit.m4 that enables/disables multiple plugins if not found. So
> >>> when you configure, it says something like this:
> >>>
> >>>    checking for WebKit >= x.xx ... no
> >>>       Disabling plugins: WebHelper, Devhelp, Markdown
> >>
> >> I don't see this, the *plugin* should define what it needs, not
> >> some arbitrary external build script.  My (limited) understanding
> >> of the plugin autofoo is that is how its done now by having local
> >> build scripts in each plugin.
> >>
> 
> Yeah, and currently the plugins each check for the same shared 
> dependencies, but it doesn't show what they're checking for, it just 
> shows the plugin's name, like:
> 
>      checking for DEVHELP ... no
> 
> What I'm asking about is to have a webkit.m4 (for example) or
> something that the plugins which use that dependency can make use of
> and so the check is only done once and if not found, it ouputs as I
> said previously. Of course I don't know if it's realistic/feasible,
> which is why I was asking.

Sounds like a great idea. I support this wish. 

> >> If they require different versions that might mean you get
> >> Webhelper and Devhelp but not Markdown, but your scheme won't
> >> allow that.  So if the Markdown dev added some new feature that
> >> needed a higher version I can't build the other two unless I
> >> upgrade my system :(
> >>
> 
> I mean they should require the same version, the same *lowest*
> version they can work with (even if they need some minor changes to
> make it possible).

Should but not have to. I agree.

> >> We should not be forcing the *highest* version needed by plugins.
> >
> 
> Not what I meant. But it's sort of what we do now if you consider 
> building geany-plugins as a whole.
> 
> > I agree. But I also see the point of consolidation of dependencies.
> > Its getting really complicated to say geany-plugins needs this
> > dependencies, but I think its an issue we need to solve on social
> > level, not trying to solve it with some hack. Is there any chance
> > to get a complete list which plugins depend on which library out of
> > autotools?
> >
> 
> What I was asking about wouldn't be a hack, it would just be to
> change the plugins a bit so they depend on the same version of shared 
> libraries, and then to have Autotools do a check for the shared
> dependency.

Yes. It's mainly not a technical issue. Just some social issue where
developers/maintainer have to talk to each other. 

> For a list of the dependencies, you can look through the `build` 
> directory's .m4 files and manually extract them (like I did for some
> of the shared ones previously). The ones with the highest versions
> will be the "minimum version required" to build geany-plugins (as a
> whole).

Maybe building a script doing this would be a good idea. 

Cheers, 
Frank
-- 
http://frank.uvena.de/en/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.geany.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20120805/68ad8157/attachment.pgp>