incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mathias Bauer <Mathias_Ba...@gmx.net>
Subject Re: [Repo][Proposal] OOO340 SVN Dump file import
Date Fri, 19 Aug 2011 12:10:28 GMT
On 19.08.2011 13:43, Ingrid von der Mehden wrote:

> Am 18.08.2011 18:27, schrieb Mathias Bauer:
>> On 18.08.2011 17:17, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
> [...]
> 
>>> 2) Do we have the basic directory structure right? (Could fix that
>>> later, but easier to get it right initially)
>>
>> The structure is fine and AFAIK reflects the consensus, just the names
>> "main" and "extras" are debatable. We will have an "extras" module in
>> the "main" repo, perhaps we can find a better name for that part. But
>> that can be changed easily post import.
>>
> 
> If we want to change the 'outer' directory names, lets change them now. 
> It is difficult enough for people to learn all the new things and find 
> the way to the code. So let us not make it more complicated by changing 
> the main repository path more often than necessary.

I doubt that changing it next week, directly after import, would confuse
anyone. OTOH getting the first import soon and not postponing it until
this discussion has settled is a big step forward.

> 
> For the two 'extras' directories I would favor to move as much stuff as 
> possible from the inner 'extras' to the outer 'extras'. If that is not 
> possible lets rename the inner one. Looking at the deliver list we seem 
> to have wordbooks and fonts here. All the gallery content and the 
> templates are here also even with localization! I doubt that most of 
> this is really needed for the typical day to day coding. It's more 
> design related stuff. So moving this out of 'main' would be a benefit. 
> But that move can be done later. When we do that I would like to 
> consider moving module helpcontent2 to the outer extras directory also.

Hm, what is the meaning of "main"? Is it a "minimal" repository that is
needed for building at least the code or should it be what makes up the
"regular" en-US build? If we agree that it's the latter, the "extras"
module belongs into "main". Of course we can think about breaking it
into several parts, like "templates", "gallery" etc. That would be an
improvement not only because it avoids the name clash.

> I haven't looked so deeply into the new build system and the packaging 
> so far. Would it be possible to build a minimal office install set with 
> or without the outer 'extras' directory dependent on its existence? Or 
> is it necessary to define some environment variables?

It's not a problem of the build system, the packaging is too inflexible
ATM. But that can be tweaked also. The new build system is capable of
working with several (sub-)repositories, the old one still needs the
"source_config" crutch.

Regards,
Mathias

Mime
View raw message