Hello John,
Excerpt from John Beckett: I am all with you here. I just want to add a note. see below. > Here are some thoughts for a group-managed repo. > > It must be simple for the group managers, and for file > maintainers, and for Bram. It must also be simple for anyone to > report a problem or make a suggestion. > > It should be similar to the existing Vim repo, and Mercurial > should be available just as for the Vim repo. > > It should not alienate an original maintainer who is responsive > to requests but who might not want to participate in a utopian > group-managed scheme. > > Flexibility is required. For example, Chip Campbell might > maintain the master copy of his plugins, and change requests > would be by email request direct to Chip, and he would send > updates to the group (not sure how). > > Anyone might send a comment or update to Bram, and he could > handle that by sending it to the group for standard processing. > > The Vim repo is (first URL is a 301 redirect to second): > http://vim.googlecode.com/ > http://code.google.com/p/vim/ > > How about setting up an independent repo (not a clone) at > http://vim-runtime.googlecode.com/ > Code license: GNU GPL v2 runtimefiles are all (or better they all should be) licensed under Vim licences. This is important to note. Uniform licening in all runtimefiles and make sure they all stay at this level is one of the todos that our team should take care of. Their are some more "standardizations" that i would like us to work on. > The repo would contain directories like: > vim-runtime > +--plugin > +--syntax > > Using 'vim-runtime' for the root might help reduce confusion > with the 'runtime' directory in the Vim distribution. > > Subject to what the original file maintainer wants, the email > address in a file would be vim-...@vim.org (that could be > instead of the original maintainer, or in front of, or after, > or not present -- as wanted by the original file maintainer). > > I assume the above scheme would allow approved members to > use Mercurial to push commits. Has anyone tested that to > see what happens? Each member needs a Google account? > > Ben Fritz has pointed out that a second independent repo could > be created (vim-runtime-dev?) where any maintainer or other > interested party could be given access for "hg push". Then > reviewers could pull changes into the stable vim-runtime repo. > Ben mentioned that if a Google code repo is a clone of another, > the clone cannot have a second committer. So, each repo would > have to be fully independent. A second repo could happen later, > when there was a demonstrated need. > > John > -- Regards, Thilo 4096R/0xC70B1A8F 721B 1BA0 095C 1ABA 3FC6 7C18 89A4 A2A0 C70B 1A8F -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
