On Dec 15, 2008, at 3:28 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: >> On Dec 12, 2008, at 3:44 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: >>> Chris McCormick wrote: >>>> On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 01:06:32AM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner >>>> wrote: >>>>> What about the idea of having a separate section like /pure- >>>>> data/svn- >>>>> externals? >>> >>> hmm, i'm trying (not so) hard to remove the ./abstractions folder in >>> favour of a grand unified ./externals folder... >> That will take a lot of political organizing, as we saw before. >> In the mean time, I don't see much harm in having /pure-data/svn- >> externals > > i am more a fan of gradual migration than of sudden switches. this > allows people to adapt changes at their own pace. > sometimes it is a bit hard to do (e.g. when migrating from cvs to > svn), othertimes it is simpler. > if we agree that it might be a good idea to merge ./abstractions > and ./externals because all of them contain "external objects" (as > explained in your other mail), then i don't see a reason to > introduce yet another directory that has to be migrated when the > time is nigh. > > >>> in some other projects i noticed "packages" which are modules >>> containing >>> both the local code plus dependencies (the latter handled solely >>> via >>> svn:externals) >> Using svn:externals for dependencies means that using --ignore- >> externals would then break. > > indeed it does! > > the two things are unrelated; i was jus trying to add another > viewpoint (though i might have forgotten that i already mentioned > that). "packages" in this context meant small packages (e.g. > "libraries") rather than te entire shebang. > > >> Do you have an example of such a project? >> I am currently using OpenEmbedded a lot for the Reware ARM disk >> images. OpenEmbedded tracks hundreds of external projects. It >> uses git, which has nothing like svn:externals. Instead, the >> build system, bitbake, which handles downloading the source code >> to package. If we really want to make a distributed build system, >> then someone should build it from > > > i do not oppose to explicitely downloading external dependencies at > all. via bitbat or whatever mechanism. > > >> bitbake or some other proven tool, not kludge it with svn:externals. > > however to claim that "bitbake" is a 'proven tool' opposed to the > 'ugly kludge' "svn:externals" is a bit euphemistic. > unless of course you compare all the millions of openembedded > developers to the handful of people using subversion.
How many large integration projects are using svn:externals. That's the real question. I've worked on a few, like WRT54G firmwares and openembedded. The WRT stuff usually imports the code releases, OpenEmbedded has a whole system of downloading the right versions with automatic handling of mirrors. > but anyhow: what do we want to solve with all this "external" stuff > (be it pushed into the repo, pulled implicitly or pulled explicitly)? > adding new "Pd-libraries" (1st level packages) or build- > dependencies (2nd level packages). > this 2 might well be handled differently. I think it is a good idea to get rid of 'abstractions' and 'externals'. They should probably called 'libraries', or something like that. .hc > > > fgmsdr > IOhannes > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- You can't steal a gift. Bird gave the world his music, and if you can hear it, you can have it. - Dizzy Gillespie _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list