Am 10.02.19 um 17:43 schrieb Christian Grothoff: IMHO gnunet should be split into repos like this:
- framework ("core")
- applications
- file sharing
- conversation
- reclaim
- secushare
I would expect every developer working on one of the applications to
understand he/she needs to install the framework first. (This is much
like KDE is organized.)
Using a monorepo for all of this will lead to even more configure-flags,
a complex CI setup, ugly merges and complicated bi-secting.
> I wrote *good* package maintainers (those that
> put in the effort)
From a packages perspective: You are wasting my time! I have other
things to do but do split up you f*** package!
Seriously! When using a huge repo we are shifting the burden onto the
packager. If we provide smaller, reasonably sliced repos, this makes
packager's live much easier. TeXLive should be a warning for us, same as
the gockel's android tools.
--
Schönen Gruß
Hartmut Goebel
Dipl.-Informatiker (univ), CISSP, CSSLP, ISO 27001 Lead Implementer
Information Security Management, Security Governance, Secure Software
Development
Goebel Consult, Landshut
http://www.goebel-consult.de
Blog: https://www.goe-con.de/blog/chatsecure-ist-tot-lang-lebe-chatsecure
Kolumne:
https://www.goe-con.de/hartmut-goebel/cissp-gefluester/2010-08-scheingefechte-um-rim
0x7B752811BF773B65.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ GNUnet-developers mailing list GNUnet-developers@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
