[sword-devel] How broadly do we define "API" (was: Re: which engine sources to use )

Gregory Hellings greg.hellings at gmail.com
Tue Jun 9 21:14:56 MST 2009

On Jun 9, 2009, at 22:51, Dmitrijs Ledkovs <dmitrij.ledkov at gmail.com>  

> 2009/6/10 Greg Hellings <greg.hellings at gmail.com>:
>> I know the question has been raised before about separating utilities
>> from the library but nothing has ever shaken out of it.  To me, this
>> again makes sense in this category.  If the utilities were placed  
>> into
>> their own SVN repository they could easily be released on their own
>> schedule with their own requirements.  An svn:externals could force
>> the source to be included with an SVN checkout of the library, but
>> could allow the utilities to be conceptually "operated" as a set of
>> highly specialized front-ends (which is really what they are) for the
>> library and released on their own schedule.
>> --Greg
> Keep the same svn. With a little bit of auto-foo magic you can
> generate two different tarballs and release either of them at their
> respective schedules.

I don't think that it's a technical issue that people are worried  
about as much as it is a conceptual one. If it's a separate repo, I  
think it's easier for most people to think of "releasing" the  
utilities separately when appropriate.  Releasing a single  
subdirectory within another project that has its own release schedule  
seems more counterintuitive than including a related project as an  
external.  However, at this point, moving to an external repo could  
fragment all the SVN history for the utils if not done correctly.

But minimally the autotools magic should probably be reworked to allow  
such releases by whichever method.


> IMHO this should be at least done for the bindings. Because python
> bindings autofoo assumes that the libsword is already installed on the
> system during build-time. This is very hard to satisfy on buildd /
> chroot. On the other hand if bindings were a separate tarball it could
> easily build-depend on libsword such that we (as is packagers) create
> libsword package first and then create bindings package.
> Maybe I'm wrong. In that case could you please suggest how to build
> python bindings when all you have is compiled sword in the current
> directory, or you have libsword installed into $DESTDIR eg. in debian
> case ./debian/libsword/usr/lib/ and other similar paths.
> -- 
> With best regards
> Dmitrijs Ledkovs (for short Dima),
> Ледков Дмитрий Юрьевич
> _______________________________________________
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

More information about the sword-devel mailing list