I'm finally getting back to responding here... James Carlson wrote: > Mark J. Nelson writes: >> The main advantage to keeping a registry of systems: tools like webrev >> or comment checkers could be configurable to list and prioritize the >> valid backends. This would also make it easier to mix references in >> webrevs and changeset comments, to reference fixes in upstream systems, >> and to evolve policies and best practicies about embedding references in >> changeset comments. > > This sounds like a great idea.
Thanks! >> Thoughts? >> >> What other information should be tracked? > > It's possible that some tools might need a separate link for editing, > and yet another for programmatic (e.g., XML) output, but what you have > looks like a good start to me. Ok. In addition, I'm assuming that, normally, new fields would be allowed to be blank for existing entries. Or, worst case, that the data space is small enough that completely populating new fields would not be overly burdensome. >> Where should this go? (I think in a repository underneath the tools >> community, possibly by itself?) > > A simple text file delivered with SUNWonbld sounds like a start. > /opt/onbld/etc/comment.reg? Hm. Now there are two questions: 1. Where should this go? 2. Should this be packaged? For where it goes, I don't like putting it in ON. It's not an artifact of ON. It might seem like overkill to have a single-purpose repository, but the burden of operating such a thing would be extremely small. For packaging, it's not a bad idea for SUNWonbld to include this info, because it also includes at least one tool (webrev) that will be dependent on it. Can we reasonably do that, and explicitly defer being the authoritative source of such info? --Mark _______________________________________________ tools-discuss mailing list tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
