On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Lucas Thode <[email protected]> wrote:
> > What do you do about nodes and structure that is shared among multiple > @thin trees in that scenario? Also, what about things that should be kept > with the code, but are not part of the code itself? (Leo's clones provide a > nice facility for associating code and high-level documentation such as > business requirements.) > I have often said that at most one @thin tree should be responsible for each clone. For example, in leoPy.leo, the actual source files "own" (not an official term) each node, while almost all clones end up in @thin leoProjects.txt. This file uses @all to allow clones to be included without regard to whether, for example, section definition nodes are actually referenced. I think of this as not so much a technical issue, but a management issue. Just as two human managers are unlikely to agree to shared responsibility for a piece of code, so too it is likely to be unwise to have two source files share cloned nodes. I consider it bad (management) style. YMMV. Edward --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
