Comment 15 for bug 490304

Jamie Bennett [2010-01-05 12:44 -0000]:
> I've discuss with quite a few of upstream now and it seems if we want
> edje (and its required for this cycle) then we need embryo. What can we
> do to push this one through?

Well, if we need it for an important blueprint, or have a business
commitment to it, then it's not so much a question of "if" in the
first place.

As I already said, this looks like a rather obscure and hard to
maintain piece of code -- a VM without formal tests is a disaster
waiting to happen if you ever need to fix anything in it. If it's only
used in the cotext of edje, then it might be much better to just
integrate embryo into edje instead of offering it as a separate public
API. Does edje, and the applications above that have any test suite
or test plan which would allow at least a shallow testing of embryo?

If the mobile team wants to commit to maintaining this, it's fine, but
I would like to see a firm and explicit statement about that. If you
rely on something like this, then you might not get away with "Minimal
maintenance needed" and "Debian responsible for bugs", but we should
have someone who has at least a basic understanding of how this works,
and check whether these pieces are at least documented somewhere.

Martin
--
Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org)