Robert Joop wrote:
>
> folks,
>
> i find the CVS structure rather confusing.
Ok, that's true :-(
> to pick one openca version, one has to chose from one of the three
> openca{,-0.8,-0.9} directories, plus the other openca-* directories,
> which contain parts of openca that are packaged as perl modules?
> why are two perl modules in openca-0.[89] and not in the top level
> directory as the other perl modules?
Here the organization:
openca-0.(8|9) are full snapshots. The missing modules are a bug!
openca/ are all the cgi-bin/, htdocs/ etc.
openca-... are the modules
> i understand (michael told me) that you are using filessystem directories
> instead of cvs branches to guard against user errors (using cvs), but
> why do you use this concept only for some part of openca and not the
> rest?
So the actual state of the CVs is the following:
openca-0.8 - full featured OpenCA 0.8
openca-0.9 - full featured OpenCA 0.9
openca/ - actually completely outdated
openca-xyz - perl module OpenCA::XYZ
openca-ocsp(|d) - ocsp-code
> why are you using the vendor branch for openca-0.9, not just the main
> branch as in openca-0.8?
> do you plan to 0.9 development in the main branch and to track 0.8
> changes in 0.9's vendor branch?
My mistake I use "cvs import" to import openca-0.8 into openca-0.9.
After the first commit you have the normal numbers (1.2, 1.3, ...)again.
CVS saves the original imported code in a so called vendorbranch 1.1.1.
Regards Michael
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Bell Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rechenzentrum - Datacenter Email (work):
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Humboldt-University of Berlin Tel.(work): +49 (0)30-2093 2482
Unter den Linden 6 Fax.(work): +49 (0)30-2093 2959
10099 Berlin
Germany [OpenCA Core
Developer]
http://openca.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
OpenCA-Devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openca-devel
