Hey All, It wasn't my intention to start a general plugins deployment discussion on this specific list, but it might be useful anyway seeing as how the Engines system is attractive to groups thinking about ways to do mass deployments and to develop reusable code. We can keep going offline if you think this is too far OT.
None of the comments so far really change the fact that an SCM system shouldn't be in use here at all. SCM systems are not intended and not suited to be used in this way and, IMO, it is a serious barrier to adoption of the plugins technology in established development groups to dictate they have to use a certain SCM system. Wrong, just plain wrong and just because this is the way things are now doesn't mean that's how they should stay. The fact that installing a plugin is possible at all without using subversion shows that on some level someone recognized this as true. Of course James has made getting a tagged release easy, and that is good enough for us for now. Thank you, James, we do appreciate that. This way we can install a particular release of the Engine plugin if we want and link to it in all our installs. The "lowest common denominator" rationalization is exactly why we got stuck with such a crappy tool in CVS for so many years, and subversion is only a nominal improvement over CVS. If we would like established groups with a real need for stability in the environment (e.g. they are rolling out mass deployments) to adopt plugins like Engines then a better mechanism for releasing, versioning and controlling plugins as discrete packages is what has to happen. We can easily do this for ourselves given what James has graciously provided, but imagine if you needed subversion installed to get Ruby installed. How many people do you think would be using Ruby today? And the fact that RoR uses subversion internally is a total red herring: subversion is in no way required to get my hands on rails and use it, nor should it be. The gems system is the real workhorse in this case, and it's doing the job it's designed to do. Finally, thinking that what I'm saying is that developers should release tags in a whole slew of different SCM systems and packages in different file formats misses my point altogether. The plugins community needs to find a good package management system, not an SCM system, and use that. Probably be even easier than using any SCM system out there anyway. What SCM system you use in your projects is and should be nobody else's call. That's probably all I have to say, for which I bet some are glad ;-) But it's a good discussion to have, I think. Cheers, John On Sep 7, 2006, at 1:08 AM, Peter Michaux wrote: > On 9/7/06, James Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> As for releasing tarballs, that puts additional workload on the >> developer, and we're all lazy, aren't we :) > > I would much rather see developers develop then spend time releasing > tags in many formats. Deployments, releases, etc are not fun. SVN > works fine and it is better if all plugin developers are using SVN > then some using SVN, some using CVS, some using tar balls, etc. > > Peter > _______________________________________________ > 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
