Re: [RFC] Header organization of -base & -gui

[David Ayers]

Adam Fedor wrote:

> I was saying I was conflicted about what we should do, but that it was 
> probably best just to remove the gnustep directory and move everything 
> (i.e. everything that is an independent project) to the top-level 
> Header directory. I think unicode is part of baseadd and should go 
> there (GNustepBase/unicode?) 

Well, then maybe we shouldn't rush into it yet and let it sink a bit 
more.  *If* we move unicode into GNUstepBase/unicode, we might already 
be defeating the purpose of the -framework installation with PB, because 
I doubt that they provide for subdirectories. If they did, then we 
should have been able to keep gnustep/base also.

> > Can I interpret this as an "OK not to install"?  I think the /rare 
> > cases/ can rely on private local declarations.
>
> Yes. 

Thanks!

> > > Doesn't matter to me. The Foundation Extensions is completely 
> > > unsupported (as far as I am concerned) and technically shouldn't 
> > > even be in the repository (wrong license). I've kept it there 
> > > because the db and gsweb library needed it. Hopefully we can 
> > > transition away from it.
> >
> > I'll work up a patch for db to use -baseadd instead, while waiting on 
> > the "the decision".  Richard already fixed gsweb.
> Well, I though db was obsoleted by gdl2? If you want to patch it, 
> that's fine, but don't do extra work on my account...

Well on the one hand, yes. I'm convinced that gdl2 is in a lot better 
shape than db.  But it does have a different (older) API.  Personally I 
believe it's quite dead.  I've quickly dug into making the patch anyway, 
but I must admit that I'm not necessarily keen on redoing the qualifier 
parser (unless I can easily use the one from gdl2, I haven't checked 
yet), if no one is interested in db anymore.

I guess I'll have to post the request for removal on the user lists 
though first (unless someone here already objects).

Cheers,
David