GNU bug report logs - #67473
[PATCH gnome-team 00/12] Hopefully the last world rebuild

Previous Next

Full log

Message #307 received at 67473 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Vivien Kraus <vivien <at> planete-kraus.eu>
Cc: rg <at> raghavgururajan.name, Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>,
 67473 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH gnome-team v5 11/19] gnu: Deprecate libsoup-minimal.
Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2023 08:54:43 -0500

Hi Vivien,

Vivien Kraus <vivien <at> planete-kraus.eu> writes:

> Le vendredi 08 décembre 2023 à 17:09 -0500, Maxim Cournoyer a écrit :
>> IIUC, a minimal libsoup variant is not needed at this point since
>> inkscape depends on libsoup-minimal-2 rather than libsoup-minimal.
>> 
>> That may be true currently, but we should be ready for when a newer
>> Inkscape release is ready for a modern libsoup.  When this happens,
>> we'll still need a minimal version around, so I wouldn't remove it.
>> Does this make sense?
> I don’t understand. I thought you asked for libsoup and libsoup-minimal
> to be merged, because the closure size difference was not that big.
> Libsoup-minimal is not removed, it is just marked deprecated. Do you
> want me to drop this v5 11/19?

Apologies if I've contradicted my earlier replies here.  I've given this
some more thought and unless the cycle between inkscape and
libsoup-minimal (2 or 3) no longer exists, I don't think we should let
go of the minimal variant of libsoup as it's a matter of time before
inkscape depends on libsoup 3 (at which point we'd be back at square one
in terms of cycles, right?).

If my above reasoning holds, then yes, what I'm suggesting is to drop
this 11/19 and the few following commits that follow-up on it.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.