On Friday 29 January 2010 02:59:04 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 10:28:24PM -0500, ComputerDruid wrote: > > Please respond with comments here, I want to know what the > > shortcomings of this kind of system would be. > > great - you replaced git's suboptimal builtin submodule handling with a > home-grown scripted solution which fails for *everything* but checking > out (and possibly updatating). what a progress ...
Correct. I fail to perceive how this would be a bad thing. Since you know, do enlighten me. The entire point is to get the git repos in the hands of the users in a bulk fashion. The only other all-at-once operation that might be needed is the "update everything" action. This doesn't force a user to check out the submodules if they don't want to. They could still clone out the meta-repo, clone the subrepos, then remove one they didn't want, or clone only the subrepos they wanted and only make use of the update scripts or the cmake files in the meta-repo. This is the most flexible solution I can think of, since it doesn't force anyone to clone anything more than they want to, yet still makes it easy to get everything. My only REAL worry about this kind of system would be that the scripts would get too complicated and be very difficult to maintain and debug. But I'm fairly certain that it could be accomplished with very little code, and I would expect it to be the policy of KDE too keep it that way. So basically I'm missing what action you need to do across the whole of KDE that isn't a "get everything" or "update everything".
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
