Marc Portier wrote:
>
> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> > Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> >
>
> >
> >> We decided to create a new repository for each major version, so this
> >> would require to create a cocoon-2.2 repository.
> >>
> >
> > Another thing to keep in mind is that if everybody starts
> developing 2.2
> > and nobody works on 2.1+, then it makes sense to copy all of the blocks
> > to 2.2 as well, and 2.1 will become "historical".
> >
> > ...
> >
>
> while this makes sense I thought Carsten was trying to solve
> another issue with his 'keep blocks in 2.1' idea
>
> 2.2 should introduce the so called 'real blocks' and as such will
> require a different setup/build/... which is most likely to be
> reflected in a split repository for the blocks... So I guess in
> a 2.2 focus on real blocks one would never want to have the
> source of the blocks inside the same repo, right?
>
> combining both your ideas we could go for a cocoon-blocks
> repository as soon as the cocoon-2.2 starts?
>
> (by doing a per-block-sub-dir checkout of cocoon-blocks this
> would autmatically allow for single-block-checkout so putting all
> blocks in one repo seems no blocking thing on short notice)
>
Exactly :) Yes, I thought of this, but it's something we have
to discuss and think about. So, by leaving them for now in 2.1
has two benefits: a) only one source location and b) we can
take as much as time as we need to think what's the best structure
without delaying anything further.
Carsten
|