Theo Chatzimichos posted on Sat, 22 Jan 2011 14:32:34 +0200 as excerpted: >> - On one hand, I would like user repositories to have a separate >> namespace, so that other users realize a given repo is NOT from a >> developer. >> - On the other side, what do we do when a user with a repo becomes a >> developer (and when they retire?) >> > Well, the distinction for unofficial/official overlays happen mostly in > layman -L, I don't think users pay attention to our git repo list. > Furthermore, I got at least three requests from developers to move their > repo from user/ to dev/ (same problem when devs retired). This > distinction doesn't make any sense.
Agreed with the layman distinction being the practical one for those using it. However, for site browsers the distinction could still be useful, and I prefer it in the filesystem layout rather than as a label. Does the symlink concept work? If so, what about a generic "people" subtree, with dev and user either at the same level or inside people, along with the list. Then simply symlink the individual repos to either dev or user as appropriate (or only have the dev subcase/symlink, so people can choose either dev specifically, or all users including devs). Layman could use the generic people path regardless so the path never changes, and its user/dev description could be updated along with the symlinks. Meanwhile, site browsers could choose to browse the generic version or the user/dev specific listings, as they wished. Tho with layman being the interface most will see and use in general, labels in the browser interface would probably do. I just prefer the filesystem layout distinction, especially if it's as trivial as managing a few symlinks. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
