[PD-dev] CVS to SVN ?
IOhannes m zmölnig
zmoelnig at iem.at
Fri Dec 21 19:15:08 CET 2007
Russell Bryant wrote:
> Winfried Ritsch wrote:
>> eg:
>> externals/iem/comport/[trunk|branches|tags
>> externals/iem/iemmatrix/[trunk|branches|tags
>> ...
>> externals/zexy/[trunk|branches|tags
>> externals/grill/[newlib]/[trunk|branches|tags
>
> However, I think that this externals structure sounds like a nightmare.
> Personally, I would _much_ prefer the following simplified structure:
>
> externals/[trunk|branches|tags]
>
> The latter implies that there should be separate release handling for every
> external. That sounds like it would be confusing and cumbersome to deal with.
> I think it makes more sense to package all of the "official" externals that are
> in svn in a single package. That isn't to say that you couldn't as a developer
> check out a lower level directory from svn to work just on that section ...
>
the separate externals reflect the separate developments by separate
(groups of) people.
there is no "official" externals-package that are to be packaged
together, even though pd-extended makes it look like this; but
pd-extended is "yet another project" that is targetted at a big
get-everything package: which is fine from an end-user point-of-view,
but not necessarily from a developer's point-of-view.
my initial arguing was, that for packages (like pd-extended) one could
create a bundle (e.g. svn:externals) that aggragates everything needed
in another subfolder.
back then (search the archives for "svn migration" or similar in
2007-09) the the answer to this was: "we should not beta-test
experimental features of svn" (this is what i was alluding to in my
first response to this thread)
the only other project i know where a lot of plugins by a large number
of independent (that is: not interdependent) developers are organized in
a single svn-repository is plone, where it is handled as wini has
proposed it (e.g. externals/zexy/[trunk|branches|tags]/)
probably it would be interesting to find more case-studies than just the
one.
one important thing (for me) is, that i want to reference the
source-code of my library (e.g. "zexy") with a single link and i want
to include all the revisions of my library.
i still think that one should try to find a solution that fits most
needs, and not only a few.
obviously there will be no solution to fit _all_ needs, but i think one
should go for "most" (aka: "as much as possible")
m.fda
IOhannes
More information about the Pd-dev
mailing list