incubator-allura-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Hartmann <mailbox....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: handling optional GPL dependencies
Date Fri, 10 Aug 2012 20:44:05 GMT
W dniu 07.08.2012 03:22, Dave Brondsema pisze:

> Yep. Each "tool" is a separate pluggable discoverable python package. 
> We could just bring it back into the main repo then. (The work Peter's 
> doing on #3883 is to remove some unnecessary coupling between the core 
> package and the scm tools - tests mostly iirc) 

As I mentioned on IRC, coupling proved to be more tight than tests and 
I've started looking into separating SCM support altogether. Which 
brings up the question: how much separated do we want it to be? For 
example, should Allura's vanilla install not mention any SCM at all, or 
should it point that "SCM support is available once you install a Tool 
of your choosing", or something else?

In my opinion, it would be more pragmatic to leave any notion of SCM to 
individual Tools, so that Allura's core becomes less "opinionated" about 
the choice of tools to use. But that would of course be much harder (if 
possible at all) and perhaps require api changes :) But then again, 
perhaps it's better to do it now, when most (all?) of publicly available 
tools are maintained in Allura's repo source tree and can be adjusted at 
will.

Hence i'm asking for input here.

Mime
View raw message