On 02.07.2011 04:14, Greg Stein wrote:
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 17:18, Greg Stein<[email protected]>  wrote:
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 16:58, Michael Stahl<[email protected]>  wrote:
...
but actually i think that a lot of these 250 CWSes will not contain a
changeset that is not in the master already; a lot of developers create new
CWS and then (have to) work on something else for some weeks...

so i have adapted the fetch script to skip empty CWSes.

Saw that. Great!

I used that code to figure out which are empty, and then commented
those out from the cws-list.txt file. I think it is best to keep the
code in there, regardless. Somebody may want run it in the future.

When I was working on this, however, I noticed we were not attempting
to fetch the cws_l10n repositories. So I fixed the filter, but
Mercurial said those repositories are not related to DEV300. What is
going on there, and what do we need to fix? Should we be fetching the
cws_l10n/* repositories? And if so... how do we integrate that into
our single repository, and then into our svn repository?

these need to be pulled into the l10n repository, not the main repository:
http://hg.services.openoffice.org/master_l10n/OOO340/

and i'd expect almost all of these to be empty.

the l10n repo contains a single top-level module.

we could integrate these in SVN in 2 ways:
1. like we did in the old times, as a top-level module next to all
   the other ones:
        ooo/trunk/{hundreds of modules}
        ooo/trunk/l10n

2. under a separate root:
        ooo/trunk/{hundreds of modules}
        ooo-l10n/trunk/l10n

1. has the advantage that everything can be branched/tagged in one operation, while 2. has the advantage that it's easier for developers that only build en-US to not waste disk space/build time (the build system is already prepared to have it "optional").

(of course there are other ways we could split up the modules, like e.g. have a separate Apache URE product upon which Apache OOo can depend, but that's not something we should discuss now...)

--
"Inexact sciences like economics advance funeral by funeral."
 -- Paul Samuelson

Reply via email to