On Sun, 2010-03-14 at 11:29 +0100, Axel Simon wrote: > > So we need *split* current darcs repository after convert all > > libraries? > > Yes, I will probably make sense to split Gtk2Hs in many smaller darcs > repositories. I might keep the just published packages in one > repository, though.
Axel, I would suggest not fully splitting the main gtk2hs repository. For the core bits that have the same maintainers and release cycles there is probably very little advantage to splitting. The disadvantage would be that you could not do cross-cutting patches/changes. If you still want to build them all together then you'd need extra management scripts to get all the repositories (see for example the complexity the ghc tree has to deal with by having independent libraries). That said, it may make perfect sense for some of the non-core parts that have obvious maintainers and could have separate releases. Similarly probably it makes sense not to aggregate even more components into the main repo. Duncan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Gtk2hs-devel mailing list Gtk2hs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gtk2hs-devel
