Hi On 1 March 2016 at 04:45, Mike Jumper <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Olivier Lamy <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > > AFAIK nothing yet has been asked to infra. > > The "guacamole" repo does appear to have been created already: > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-guacamole.git No idea what is that. Maybe we can use it for the website? ATM How do you build http://guac-dev.org/ ? > > > > Perso I find that a pain to have a lot of repositories (but sure it's me > > :-) ) > > Probably not just you. ;) > > There's definitely a tricky balance between the potential > inconvenience of multiple repositories, and the potential confusion of > combining disparate projects. > > > What about having those docker modules included in server and client. > > It looks everything is released together? > > BTW those dockers repositories are just simple configuration files. > > > > This would mean only 3 repositories: > > * guacamole-client > > * guacamole-server > > * guacamole-manual > > > > Is it really a problem? > > > > No problem, in my opinion. That sounds like a good compromise. > So if no one complains until tomorrow 10am (my time) I will ask those 3 git repos to be created :-) > > In our case, the Docker repositories aren't just simple config files, > however. Each has associated scripts which download/build the source, > generate configuration files based on environment variables, etc.: > > https://github.com/glyptodon/guacamole-docker/tree/master/bin > https://github.com/glyptodon/guacd-docker/tree/master/bin > > The most complex of the bunch probably being: > > https://github.com/glyptodon/guacamole-docker/blob/master/bin/start.sh > > I still think it's OK to merge the Docker repos into server and client > - just wanted to clarify the above. > > Thanks, > > - Mike > -- Olivier Lamy http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
