Marc Portier wrote: > > Vadim Gritsenko wrote: > > Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > > > > > > >> We decided to create a new repository for each major version, so this > >> would require to create a cocoon-2.2 repository. > >> > > > > Another thing to keep in mind is that if everybody starts > developing 2.2 > > and nobody works on 2.1+, then it makes sense to copy all of the blocks > > to 2.2 as well, and 2.1 will become "historical". > > > > ... > > > > while this makes sense I thought Carsten was trying to solve > another issue with his 'keep blocks in 2.1' idea > > 2.2 should introduce the so called 'real blocks' and as such will > require a different setup/build/... which is most likely to be > reflected in a split repository for the blocks... So I guess in > a 2.2 focus on real blocks one would never want to have the > source of the blocks inside the same repo, right? > > combining both your ideas we could go for a cocoon-blocks > repository as soon as the cocoon-2.2 starts? > > (by doing a per-block-sub-dir checkout of cocoon-blocks this > would autmatically allow for single-block-checkout so putting all > blocks in one repo seems no blocking thing on short notice) > Exactly :) Yes, I thought of this, but it's something we have to discuss and think about. So, by leaving them for now in 2.1 has two benefits: a) only one source location and b) we can take as much as time as we need to think what's the best structure without delaying anything further.
Carsten
