[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Proposal to improving KDE Software Repository Organization
From:       Luigi Toscano <luigi.toscano () tiscali ! it>
Date:       2015-08-16 21:36:33
Message-ID: 55D10261.1020303 () tiscali ! it
[Download RAW message or body]

David Faure ha scritto:
> On Sunday 16 August 2015 13:51:29 Michael Pyne wrote:
> > There's no reason even with our current build metadata that we'd *have* \
> > to  have project hierarchies, as long as each underlying git repository \
> > name  remains unique. It might even make things easier since there \
> > would be no way  for a sub-path in our project hierarchy (such as \
> > kde/kdelibs/kactivities) to  mask a git repository name (kdelibs in \
> > this case).
> 
> Ben and I discussed it today and we think there is usefulness in one \
> level of subtree within the Applications product, to be able to keep the \
> 'groups' like kdegraphics, kdemultimedia etc. which are useful in order \
> to have a maintainer per 'group' (as reinforced by the release team \
> recently). 
> But yes, only one level, and AFAICS only useful in Applications.
> kactivities (to pick your example) would be "at the root of" Frameworks, \
> no sub-path needed. 
Does it mean a giant big blob for extragear and playground? \
Translation-wise, having the 'groups' is really useful to not get lost.

Also, when phabricator support subproject, using groups would be useful \
again to not have a big blob of projects (it was one of the few complains I \
recorded for phabricator, the big list of projects).

Ciao
-- 
Luigi


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]