On 12.01.11 15:28:38, Marcel Wiesweg wrote: > > > Then why split at all? All your points above suggest that having a split > > repository has no benefit for you and its unclear wether it'll ever have > > any benefit. > > I left out the points why splitting is a benefit and collected only > those small problems arising with splitting ;-) > > > Having said that, if someone in your team wants to setup a repository that > > has a shell script to pull the other ones in, there's no technical reason > > speaking against that (AFAIK). > > Summing up yours and Ian's answer, we could setup a super repo for > convenience > of building the whole module, with some technical solution to pull in the > split repos, but require the modules to build standalone. > > Brings two more questions: > > a) should CMake modules be moved up to kdelibs or down to the submodule that > needs them?
Pushed down, if you move them to kdelibs they'd need to be installed to be usable for your projects, which in turn means they need to keep source-compatibility. Of course in the longer-run you should try to get them into cmake itself (file a bugreport, possibly suggesting the author of the module as maintainer). > b) Would the super-repo be associated with the KDE/kdegraphics project on > projects.kde.org, or what place and name would it have? As a user I'd expect the repo for kdegraphics to be the one which 'rules them all' :) Andreas -- You are scrupulously honest, frank, and straightforward. Therefore you have few friends. _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
