Am 12. November 2015 17:56:51 MEZ, schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt <jp.vo...@gmx.de>: >Hi Urs, > >this is a great idea! This would mean development of an API for >plugins/modules - and anybody can develop against that API ...
Well, actually this is more or less in place already now. Re-building OLL would give the opportunity to iron out a few glitches. I intentionally refrained from pushing more than the handful of libraries to the new structure. >I am at work right now, so now for short: > >The solution c would be nice, but I would say, we should stay on github > >... we have other work to do and life offline ;) That doesn't really answer my question. *Moving* to the new location would mean zero work as I have Gitlab running and in use already. The issue us the maintenance. Urs > >Cheers, >Jan-Peter > >Am 12.11.2015 um 17:06 schrieb Urs Liska: >> Hi all, >> >> I've for a while been thinking about re-building openLilyLib at a new >> location. For several reasons: >> >> 1) >> The conversion from the "original" heap of snippets (the snippets in >the >> various top-level directories) to a "new" structure (the "libraries" >> inside the /ly directory of the repository) is proceeding >significantly >> slower than expected so the awkward situation that users have to >> maintain both the root and one directory inside in LilyPond's include >> path seems to be a somewhat semi-permanent state. >> >> 2) >> If the "new" *library* infrastructure was in a new repository there >is >> no need to *completely* move the existing stuff and find appropriate >> spots in the new libraries. Instead we could keep the somewhat >unordered >> collection of snippets as a more open "playground" and build the >proper >> library infrastructure separately. >> >> 3) >> I realized that the current "layout" with the libraries living >*inside* >> openLilyLib is suboptimal for several reasons, and I want the >libraries >> to be maintained in individual repositories. So there will be the >"core" >> openLilyLib providing the infrastructure and common functionality and >an >> arbitrary number of libraries that can be maintained independently, >> making responsitibility for maintainership clearer and allowing >better >> control of project membership. >> >> I'm pretty clear with that and wouldn't ask for comments (although >I'll >> of course listen to any objections), but I'm not sure about the best >> location for the new repositories. >> >> a) >> We could just add new repositories in the "openlilylib" organization >on >> Github. >> >> b) >> We could create a new organization or add the repos to the existing >> "lilypond" organization >> >> c) >> We could move everything to https://git.openlilylib.org. >> >> In a way I would prefer c) because: >> >> - it "looks" more natural >> - it would move away some stuff from Github >> - it would make it more natural to have git hooks process stuff and >> deploy the library and/or the documentation to other locations on >> openlilylib.org >> >> But there are also drawbacks to c) because it is hosted on my own >(well, >> hosted in a data center) server: >> >> - I can guarantee availability to a lesser extent than a big service >> provider >> - I can't guarantee not to break things or lose everything due to >> misconfiguration >> - I can't guarantee that I will always have that kind of server or >that >> I'll even be around in the LilyPond community. >> - I don't know if there's a smooth transfer path if the latter should >> happen. >> >> Therefore I'd like to ask around what you consider an appropriate >approach. >> >> TIA >> Best >> Urs >> > > >_______________________________________________ >lilypond-user mailing list >lilypond-user@gnu.org >https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user