On 05/20/13 23:24, Carl Eastlund wrote:
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Asumu Takikawa <as...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
On 2013-05-20 14:42:15 -0600, Matthew Flatt wrote:
Eventually, when the dust settles, I think we'll want to convert every
directory to its own git repo, and then we can incorporate the
individual repos as git submodules.
One nice thing about the current repo organization is that push
notifications for every part of the PLT codebase go to all of the
developers.
Will that still be available in this organization scheme? (I don't care
if it's opt-in too much, but opt-out will hopefully mean more eyes see
the code)
Cheers,
Asumu
Overall, I'm really glad to see Racket moving into the package system. I
think it will be good for both (the Racket core and the package system).
I'd like to mention, though, that git submodules can be a real pain for
synchronizing development of multiple repositories. They seem to have been
designed primarily for importing upstream repositories, rather than for
multiple "peer" repositories. I'm not much more fond of the alternatives I
have tried, either; if we're committing to splitting Racket into multiple
repositories as well as multiple packages, we should be aware there may be
another minor git learning curve ahead.
Thanks to Jay and Matthew for working on all of this!
I also think that git submodules are a bad idea for packages. One git
repo per package is more simple and less problematic.
Thanks for the hard work :)
_________________________
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
