incubator-heraldry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Recordon, David" <drecor...@verisign.com>
Subject RE: SVN Structure
Date Tue, 08 Aug 2006 01:25:02 GMT
That sounds good, I think the question now just boils down to one large
repository or multiple smaller ones.  I'm impartial on having Trac
itself as long as there is a web front-end to the repo(s).

Anyone have opinions in terms of one large repo or a few smaller ones?
Would be nice to get this wrapped up in 48-72 hours so we can have the
infrastructure deployed and start getting code in next week.

--David

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Turner [mailto:kevin@janrain.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 5:07 PM
To: heraldry-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: SVN Structure

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 01:48 -0700, Recordon, David wrote:
> So, one thing that needs to happen once people get their accounts is 
> having SVN setup for the project.  I'm thinking it will make more 
> sense for this project to have one for each broad set of development
work.
> 
> As a strawman from the proposal:

To your straw man, I counter:

* heraldry-libraries
 - python
  - openid-auth
   - trunk
   - branches/
   - tags/
  - openid-dtp
   - trunk, branches, tags
  - php
   - ...

Key features here are:
 1) don't put the spec version in the directory structure.  We are
trying to maintain a lot of compatibility between spec versions, so the
same codebases will probably span several spec versions.

 2) do language/project, not project/language.  The various projects for
a particular language will probably be used together, so this clustering
is more natural for a developer checking out a project.

 3) defining where we put trunk and branches.[1]  I think this is the
right level -- when you branch, you're going to want to branch one
project, not all of heraldry-libraries.


I don't really have an opinion on whether the libs and other apps are
all in one big repository or whether the libs get one repository and the
apps get their own.  Either seems fine to me.   The only thing I can
think of to take under consideration there is if we're going to want to
configure some tool like trac to integrate with the subversion repo, in
which case it would matter then.

For the IDP projects, the directories should perhaps be named as the
applications are named, and not just for their implementation languages.
On the other hand, if the idp apps are just named "PHP Server", there's
not much difference.

Cheers,

 - Kevin


[1] for those unfamiliar with how subversion approaches branches, see
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.2/svn.branchmerge.using.html


Mime
View raw message