Add BiDi infrastructure

[Alexandre Julliard]

Shachar Shemesh <wine-devel at sun.consumer.org.il> writes:

> I may have came across wrong. I am not suggesting we stick to
> libfribidi forever, whatever it can do is fine, and what it can't
> won't be done. To emphasize this point, you will notice that my patch
> does not export any of libfribidi's functions. In retrospect, I think
> I'll rename the .c file to "bidi" - will be more apropriate.
> 
> I am saying that it is covering all of our current needs, and thus we
> should go for it as it saves us somewhere between a month of work and
> half a year (calendaric time, estimates based on assumption that I'm
> the only one working on it). If at some future time we come to the
> conclusion that libfribidi is not enough, we can either add the
> required functionality to it, integrate it into Wine or replace it
> altogether. I am hoping that, by that time, interest in wine will be
> high enough for more people to be involved.

What I'm saying is that it's not a good idea to start using fribidi,
create dependencies and problems for packagers, etc. if we know that
it's a wrong design and that we will need to replace it. The truth is
that bidi is not really a priority feature (as shown by the number of
people interested in making it work), and so it doesn't really matter
if it works tomorrow or only in 3 months. What matters is to pick a
correct design so that if more people start to care they can build on
it, instead of having to throw it away and restart from scratch.

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.com