Hey Peter,

We certainly could do that, and if we decide to use the engines  
approach, may have to.

Ok, this is my one-and-only rant here, I swear:

Don't you think it's even stranger to install an entire SCM system to  
simply use it as a package manager? What could be more restricting  
than a technology designed to be used by unknown development groups  
(plugins) making such a huge assumption about what kind of SCM system  
you're using or need to use? We don't use subversion for very good  
reasons and I personally consider it a big step backward because it  
carries so many of CVS' problems with it into the future—centralized,  
non-atomic, it's super heavy, and on an on. Darcs, now there's a  
truly modern SCM ;-)

Anyway, just from a practical standpoint, I'd still like to find a  
non-subversion way to capture official releases. Might be as simple  
as requesting they be posted as tarballs ...

Thanks for the suggestion though, seriously.

John



On Sep 6, 2006, at 1:22 PM, Peter Michaux wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> Why can't you use subversion on at least one of your machines to
> download a tagged version? Seems like a strange restriction. You could
> even do it at home and email it to  yourself if you can't do it at
> work.
>
> Peter
>
> On 9/6/06, John Clayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> For various reasons, using subversion in our project is not feasible.
>> It's important that we maintain stability in our codebase though, so
>> we only want to include official releases of the Engines plugin. I
>> was hoping something like this might work: ruby script/plugin install
>> http://svn.rails-engines.org/plugins/engines/tags/rel_1.0.0, but no
>> luck, nothing there anyway.
>>
>> So, I figure either there really is no tagged release there or
>> subversion is required to get a tagged release. Since I don't use
>> subversion, I'm not sure which is true.  Can anyone illuminate?
>> Provide some way to get official releases on into the future? We
>> could always
>>
>> For my 2 cents, it's too bad that plugins are so tied to subversion
>> in the first place, and I'd really like to see a more flexible and
>> more gems-like (or any-decent-package-manager-like) method to
>> distribute them. But I digress ...
>>
>>
>> Thanks for any help,
>>
>> John
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> engine-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-users-rails- 
>> engines.org
>>
> _______________________________________________
> engine-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-users-rails- 
> engines.org

_______________________________________________
engine-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-users-rails-engines.org

Reply via email to