From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-74690-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 41522 invoked by alias); 11 Nov 2016 19:53:59 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 41507 invoked by uid 89); 11 Nov 2016 19:53:58 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=sk:incompa, fundamental, learn
X-HELO: mail-qt0-f176.google.com
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:organization
         :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=u4nQmLmIgush5eTIVb5FyWIwZJjYV+PIGJMbE+lIVzU=;
        b=WT/5p7v87Y9dhN/3lJHO/GZwvV7Csa+2vFo+OJAfGibpl2kTpD+ehsH4+FK8nxXEhh
         zUZoeGJDyPbSJZbNPcB24WKlwA4V1GFwRSUA7sB2Hj5jpaLFZ/FAuzwKN1d5aUf59TZN
         kT3GNpff/sg+uFrQWUFon+2L5GhDPDIlkyT6jNsnln1Beztwneoyu0NyFA3bWEHMjBcV
         +TDm40KiMqRDP3usye+rnFQWCfx1YYiSqqbwexlWi9madxh6yDByjp3ENWQsN9OCNKb8
         FG5Pi7+8ZGT+0i32Ey6spXASeI2w1KQdwzWHzRVsRtSBKZYEQ7bzQkNf+eIG9z/6z9Wn
         imQg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcgXTh9q7/vxA96+XxvPxpX0Z1jaxWZoca0B+mPEReFug7tf5vmSmxI0dGxyPCCa7P4
X-Received: by 10.200.37.178 with SMTP id e47mr4735862qte.7.1478894036326;
        Fri, 11 Nov 2016 11:53:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: What to do about libidn?
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
 Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
References: <44cead16-9db0-a4c0-82cd-1f6178260ed7@redhat.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1611082325180.23898@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
 <9b77b43c-f255-6401-5648-0b5cc405cf4b@redhat.com>
Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <5f72142d-92ed-8039-fb8c-dd2981a3127f@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 19:53:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9b77b43c-f255-6401-5648-0b5cc405cf4b@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg00443.txt.bz2

On 11/09/2016 07:02 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> In the broader picture, I think we should discourage out-of-tree
> ports and functionality as much as possible because if something is
> not part of regular builds because it's not in the official source
> tree, we might only learn about fundamental incompatibilities after a
> release or two, which would be annoying.  So I'd suggest the remove
> the add-on mechanism eventually.

Agreed.

I would also vote for out-of-tree functionality to be removed.

Users can simply have cloned trees with their own patches, and help
in the overall library maintenance or work with upstream to integrate
their changes.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.