fre, 22 07 2011 kl. 13:21 +0200, skrev Philip Nienhuis:
> Søren Hauberg wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> > Regarding the issue of where code is developed (SVN vs Hg vs ???) then I
> > think we should deal with this independently of the bug tracker issue.
> > That being said, my impression is that a lot of development happens
> > outside the SVN repository and when a new release is made a lot of code
> > gets checked into SVN. So I don't think our current setup is working.
> 
> ...but it doesn't stand in the way either.
> What did you want to accomplish with the current setup?
> 
> Personally I find working intensively with repositories a bit of a 
> hassle. The associated overhead only pays off when multiple developers 
> do work simultaneously at the same (sub)project. I don't see many 
> octave-forge packages being maintained by developer teams.
> 
> As long as code does get checked in, either in large chunks just before 
> release or gradually, things seem to work for developers.

I am not against having one combined repository (as we do now), I was
just trying to say that if we are to re-think the choice of repository
then perhaps we should also re-think the concept of having on combined
repository (as it is a relic from the monolithic days). For me, the
combined repository works fine as I like to have an overview of what's
going on in all packages. I, however, doubt that many developers do
that.

> > I must confess that I am not sure that the idea of using a single
> > repository for *all* packages actually works. If I want to work on
> > package X then I guess it is annoying that I have to check out the
> > entire Octave-Forge repository.
> 
> ??? As fas ar my experience goes, that doesn't hold.
> 
> When I was ready for committing to the io or java package, or updating 
> it from svn, all I did was checkout/update just those packages (using 
> Tortoise for Windows).
> 
> FYI: on my local octave-forge svn dir I only have the io, java, & 
> linear-algebra packages. Update & commit works OK (I only use Tortoise 
> for that).

Isn't it an extra hassle to figure out which directories to check out
and which to leave?

>  > The single repository seems to serve no purpose now that we moved
>  > away from the monolithic releases. So perhaps we should create a
>  > whole bunch of repositories?
> 
> I fail to see why that would be needed. It already works OK for single 
> packages.

The only purpose it would serve would be to have the repository reflect
that packages are really developed independently. Anyway, I have no
strong opinions on the matter, I just wanted to point out that there is
a mis-match between how the repository is organised and how the code is
developed.

Søren


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 Tips for Better Web Security
Learn 10 ways to better secure your business today. Topics covered include:
Web security, SSL, hacker attacks & Denial of Service (DoS), private keys,
security Microsoft Exchange, secure Instant Messaging, and much more.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426210/
_______________________________________________
Octave-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev

Reply via email to