On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 11:36 +0200, Sigurd Nes wrote: > > From: Dave Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 2008-05-19 11:09:40 CEST > > To: phpgroupware-developers@gnu.org > > Subject: Re: [phpGroupWare-developers] Re: Organising apps in svn > > > > On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 01:28 -0700, Sigurd Nes wrote: > > > > > > Looks like Maat has a clear idea on how this could be arranged. > > > If there is no objections - I would like to ask if someone could take > > > on this task (preferable Maat - since he seems like the expert here). > > > > As discussed in the past, phpGroupWare doesn't _need_ to anything. It > > is our private repo which has issues, so we need to be make the changes. > > Oops - seems like I have misunderstood the situation completely - sorry. > The shortest route will then be to arrange the Resight tree as the current > phpGroupWare tree - and we should be ok. >
It won't actually solve the problem of how long it takes to create clean patches. It will save some time, but not a lot. Changing the resight tree still won't allow semi automated patch set generation. > > It also makes more sense to start the work in our private tree, so if > > you get it wrong the impact is massively reduced. > > I misunderstood - I thought phpGrouWare was looking for a new arrangement - > and that Resight should adapt to it. phpGW has agreed to do this months ago, but when it happens depends on when someone has a spare weekend. As we discussed when we last met, it makes sense for ReSight to do it in a coordinated was instead of having to change our internal tree structure twice and allows the timing to be coordinated. Cheers Dave _______________________________________________ phpGroupWare-developers mailing list phpGroupWare-developers@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/phpgroupware-developers
