On 18.04.2013 14:38, Gary Martin wrote: > On 18/04/13 13:23, Ryan Ollos wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 4/15/13, Ryan Ollos <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi ! >>>>> >>>>> During the week end I created at Bibucket a fork of Trac XmlRpcPlugin >>>>> to add in there compatibility for Bloodhound . We need that to >>>>> integrate some desktop applications with issue tracker , but there >>>>> are >>>>> other applications even for our own use . >>>>> >>>> Great! I think it has enough value that I'd like to see XmlRpcPlugin >>>> eventually become a component of the Bloodhound distribution. >>>> >>> AFAICR trac-dev was also considering merging that plugin into Trac >>> core once upon a time . >>> >>> Considering some plans and schedule for proposals (i.e. BEPs) this >>> seems to be imminent . Of course , they'd have to be fleshed out and >>> accepted first . Still in the fridge though . >>> >>>>> After reviewing the state of xmlrpcplugin trunk , now I tried to run >>>>> its test suite . This is what I got >>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> So I'm curious : what's the estimated time to bring contrib folder >>>>> back into BH trunk ? <= if such estimation is possible of course . >>>> >>>> There is a ticket (1) for adding license headers to the files in >>> 'contrib' >>>> and some other directories, and I felt that I took ticket as far as I >>> could >>>> without additional input from a Trac developer. Most everything looked >>> fine >>>> in terms of being able to put a BSD 3-Clause license on all, or nearly >>> all, >>>> of the files in 'contrib', but I'm not optimistic that there will >>>> be any >>>> status changes of the ticket for a while. >>>> >>> ... a law of Trac inertia ... they have other important things to do >>> too . For our own sake let's keep them focused on releasing high >>> quality code ;) >>> >>>> So if everyone agrees that we have a good case for adding back >>> 'contrib', I >>>> favor doing that and just removing it from the release tarball, >>> considering >>>> Brane said this would work okay. >>>> >>> if this triggers a vote , fwiw +1 >> >> Since there were no further comments to those by Olemis and Brane, I >> went >> ahead and restored `contrib` in r1469291. >> > > I should clearly have said something earlier :) > > I think we are fine for the moment with this but if we once again need > to remove this at release time, even if only in the release artefacts, > we have only solved the problem for ourselves. If the ETA for > restoring contrib properly is far away, we might want to find another > solution to this so that users can also run the tests.
The solution is, for example: svn export http://subversion.apache.org/repos/asf/bloodhound/tags/x.y.z/trac/contrib called optionally from the bloodhound installer script. Or even export directly from the core trac repository at a particular version. -- Brane -- Branko Čibej Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com
