[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [fluid-dev] About documentation and code

From: Bernat Arlandis i Mañó
Subject: Re: [fluid-dev] About documentation and code
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:28:33 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird (X11/20090103)

Josh Green escrigué:
Originally the author (Peter Hanappe) did not want FluidSynth to have
any external dependencies.  In particular the SoundFont loading code was
borrowed from my previous application Smurf SoundFont Editor and also
Swami.  Rather than depending on the glib library, he opted to include
some of this code into the application directly.  I think glib is a
fairly minor dependency though these days and it runs on just about
every currently supported FluidSynth platform.  I think it would clean
up a lot of the code to use glib and would provide some of the
portability features that are currently kludged into FluidSynth.
I think this would ease development in the long term by reducing the amount of code. If you all agree we can entirely drop that "no external dependencies" requirement unless there's some problem.
Indeed, using a standard code indentation/syntax would be nice.  I
personally like 2 space indentation, with braces always on a new line
and some other specifics (described by the indent command: indent -bli0
-sc -ncs).  Using spaces instead of tabs would be fine too.
Overall, it seems like the code is already using a standard code indentation/syntax. I'm flexible about which one to use, but it would be easiest to follow what's already done and I think it matches your proposal.
FluidSynth is a bit overdue for a release.  Provided everything seems to
be working as it should (feedback anyone?), a release could be made and
then indent could be run on all the code and checked in.  That would
give us a new start as far as formatting is concerned.

I'm using the SVN version and it seems all good, I'm running it on Debian/64 with Jack/Alsa.

I think we should branch stable releases and develop on the trunk while fixing bugs in the stable branch. Other big changes could be done also on their own branch until they're enough tested and stable to go to the trunk.

I've noticed the SVN has a strange layout with much more directories levels that needed. This is not all that important but if there's ever going to be a fair amount of SVN activity and new developers we should make a more logical arrangement. I can help with this since I have some experience with SVN.

I'll start with documentation on the wiki, I'll keep you informed on my progress.

Best regards.

Bernat Arlandis i Mañó

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]