Rich Megginson wrote:
Mark Banner wrote:
On 27/07/2009 17:25, Rich Megginson wrote:
Would this tag the entire repo, or just the c-sdk portion? Or does it
really matter? I know with git, tags are cheap and easy to manage, so
it doesn't really matter.
Entire repo, but tagging is cheap/easy with hg too.
If it doesn't matter that non-c-sdk code will be tagged with a c-sdk
release tag, then it doesn't matter if the c-sdk repo is completely
separate.
Though it doesn't matter, I would find this odd:
probably acceptable with c-sdk in a directory repo,
but unexpected in the comm-central repo.
With git, I can use the git archive command to produce a source tarball
from a specific tag or changeset (commit). But I think that archives
Same:
hg archive [OPTION]... DEST
create an unversioned archive of a repository revision
the entire repository, not a subdirectory. If that's not possible, then
Maybe
-I --include include names matching the given patterns
-X --exclude exclude names matching the given patterns
would help?
we can just use clone and update to get the local source repo in the
right state, then just use tar directly against the source repo.
(Yes: again, the bigger the repo is the odder it feels.)
For the perl and java sdks, they can be separate, since (afaik) no other
mozilla component uses them. For the c-sdk, as long as we can preserve
the ability to develop and make c-sdk releases independent of
t-bird/seamonkey, if it makes life easier for t-bird/seamonkey
developers to have the code embedded in their larger source code
repositories, I think that would be fine.
Personally, I would think the 'c-sdk in comm-central', either as the
main repo or as just an import, was only a workaround solution in case
you would have wanted to continue with cvs. Then not relevent anymore.
But maybe others think differently.
_______________________________________________
dev-tech-ldap mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-ldap
