Re: Upcoming releases

[Alexander Malmberg]

Nicola Pero wrote:
> As far as I am aware, we have reached a complete decision already (except
> for some details).
[snip list of changes]

One big detail that's missing is the organization of headers _before_
installation. Fixing the huge discrepancy between header location before
and after installation is, at least imho, a fairly big part of the
improvements of these changes.

So, I propose (iirc, this is what's been discussed, though I'm not sure
that there was an actual decision about this), before installation:

Headers installed in Foundation/ are stored in
core/base/Headers/Foundation/
Headers installed in GNUstepBase/ are stored in
core/base/Headers/GNUstepBase/

Headers installed in AppKit/ are stored in core/gui/Headers/AppKit/
Headers installed in GNUstepGUI/ are stored in
core/gui/Headers/GNUstepGUI/

Adding to the list of changes:

3.-2. Modify -base and -gui to not create header directory symlinks in
the source tree anymore.

3.-1. For each header, figure out where it should be installed and move
it to the corresponding directory in the source tree.

[snip]
>     The very quick fix is just to modify the libraries to install headers
>     in {header dir}/{name} rather than {header dir}/gnustep/{name}.
> 
>     That might be enough for some of the core libraries; but in general,
>     it might be a good occasion to update names too, switching from a
>     short-name form ("guile", "java", "x11", "xlib") to a long-name form
>     ("GNUstepGuile", "GNUstepJava", "GNUstepBack/X11",
>     "GNUstepBack/XLib"), installing headers in {Headers}/{LongName}/
>     rather than {Headers}/gnustep/{short-name}, and updating all
>     #includes.

These changes really must be done together. It's not acceptable to have
GNUstep install it's own headers in top-level directories with names
like "guile", "java", and "x11", as these collide (or have a large risk
of colliding) with other headers.

- Alexander Malmberg