[gnutls-help] Guile-Gnutls bindings to separate git repo?

[Ludovic Courtès]

Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org> skribis:

> Now there is https://gitlab.com/jas/guile-gnutls created like this:

Great!

> git clone https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls.git guile-gnutls
> cd guile-gnutls/
> git-filter-repo --path configure.ac --path .gitignore --path
> doc/.gitignore --path README.md --path doc/ --path guile/ --path
> Makefile.am  --path m4/guile.m4 --path NEWS
> git remote add guile-gnutls git at gitlab.com:jas/guile-gnutls.git
> git push -u guile-gnutls --all
> git push -u guile-gnutls --tags

I wonder if we should omit NEWS as it blurs the history a bit, in which
case we’d later add a new NEWS file.

WDYT?

> Is this a suitable base to start on?  Maybe we can iterate a couple of
> times to get a suitable setup, I think we should prune some more in
> doc/ which according to git-filter-repo man pages should be done by
> another run of it to prune the repository further.  Getting a top-level
> configure.ac and Makefile.am is a main work item here.

Yes, in doc/ we only need gnutls-guile.texi, gnutls.texi (of which
gnutls-guile.texi was extracted) and Makefile.am I think.

> Is https://notabug.org/cwebber/guile-gcrypt a good template for a guile
> language binding of a C library?

Yes, except that Guile-Gcrypt uses the FFI (pure Scheme).

> I prefer to put the manual in doc/ but otherwise it looks good.

Agreed.

> Compared to the above setup, we may want to rename guile/ into
> gnutls/.

Or move guile/ to the top level, but maybe that can be done in a later
commit.

> One we are happy with the git repo, I would like it to be at
> gitlab.com/gnutls since then we get CI/CD build testing which I don't
> think notabug offers?  There should probably be a --path .gitlab-ci.yml
> above too.

Sounds good.

> One question is about version numbers.. it should probably have its own
> version number, right?  Would starting at 0.0.0 be a problem for
> packaging, or should we start with 3.7.8 (upstream gnutls version) and
> then count upwards (separate from GnuTLS versions) from there?  I
> prefer starting with 0.0.0 and using semantic versioning from the
> start.

That’s a good question.  I would tend to start at 1.0.0 (because it’s
stable).  However some distros, such as Debian, have a binary package
called ‘guile-gnutls’ that’s currently at 3.7.x, so the version number
may cause them trouble.  I don’t know whether we should take that into
consideration or leave it up to distros.

WDYT?

Ludo’.