Aaand the mail got sent before :)
Then two other comments that are related or I'd like to discuss:
- So far we can allow in iceberg several projects with the same name.
That is not a problem, so you can clone the same project from two different
repositories. Of course this would mean that one will be dirty all the time
(in comparison against the image).
- I'd like to "rethink" the directory structure. We have chosen to use
{owner}/{repository} for some time now, but that is only valid for those
hostings that store repositories under a username (e.g.,
github/gitlab/bitbucket) and is not valid for other kind of git
hostings/server (e.g., a home gitolite).
This makes that the directory where the repositories are, suddenly
mixes different structures {owner}/{repository} and {repository}, and we
pay that lack of coherence afterwards... But making a purely flat structure
will cause much more name clashes. And there is some story with Metacello
compatibility around it too!
I'm just not sure what is the bestish solution here. Maybe what we have
is good enough, but if somebody would like to prototype around this, I'd be
glad to learn more about pros and cons ^^.
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 9:51 AM Guillermo Polito <guillermopol...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Yes, I agree with most of the comments here. I'll try to summarize:
>
> - we should be able to specify the name of a project independently of
> their location/repository name
> - Maybe, for old projects that don't have a name, we could initialize a
> project's name as it's repository name?
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 5:07 AM Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
>
>> Sounds like the user override is what we are after - I guess we need to
>> make a pr ... sadly my laptop has died so it’s not going to be me for a
>> little while until I can find an Apple store on my travels.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 2 Oct 2018, at 12:30, Ben Coman <b...@openinworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 1 Oct 2018 at 23:16, Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Tim Mackinnon wrote
>>> > either by showing {owner}/{project}
>>>
>>> What about when there are multiple remotes?
>>>
>>
>> +1 to what you imply here, that the owner/remote should not be auto-coded
>> into the project name.
>> Remote are well handled within Iceberg.
>> The user though could add the owner as free text into a custom project
>> name i.e. "owner-project"
>>
>> cheers -ben
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Guille Polito
>
> Research Engineer
>
> Centre de Recherche en Informatique, Signal et Automatique de Lille
>
> CRIStAL - UMR 9189
>
> French National Center for Scientific Research - *http://www.cnrs.fr
> <http://www.cnrs.fr>*
>
>
> *Web:* *http://guillep.github.io* <http://guillep.github.io>
>
> *Phone: *+33 06 52 70 66 13
>
--
Guille Polito
Research Engineer
Centre de Recherche en Informatique, Signal et Automatique de Lille
CRIStAL - UMR 9189
French National Center for Scientific Research - *http://www.cnrs.fr
<http://www.cnrs.fr>*
*Web:* *http://guillep.github.io* <http://guillep.github.io>
*Phone: *+33 06 52 70 66 13
