incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Marcus (OOo)" <marcus.m...@wtnet.de>
Subject Re: proposed new directory structure for future releases
Date Fri, 24 Aug 2012 18:26:46 GMT
Am 08/24/2012 12:42 PM, schrieb sebb:
> On 24 August 2012 10:08, J├╝rgen Schmidt<jogischmidt@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 8/23/12 11:37 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/23/2012 01:14 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>> Am 08/23/2012 10:02 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 3:37 PM, RGB ES<rgb.mldc@gmail.com>   wrote:
>>>>>> 2012/8/23 Kay Schenk<kay.schenk@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>> Way back in late April, Juergen proposed a new directory structure
for
>>>>>>> release packs than what we have now which is essentially:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /stable/VERSION/<en-US items>
>>>>>>> /localized/<lang abbreviation>/VERSION/<lang items>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> there are some other areas in SF as well and I don't know if
they're
>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>> being used
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could we restart the discussion, or just again send the proposed
>>>>>>> structure,
>>>>>>> on what the "ideal" structure would look like so we could get
to
>>>>>>> work on
>>>>>>> modifying the download scripts? Thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MzK
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "As a child my family's menu consisted of two choices:
>>>>>>>       take it or leave it. "
>>>>>>>                                      -- Buddy Hackett
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Warning: Layman comment following.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even if en-US is the base for all the other builds, I see no need
to
>>>>>> completely separate it from the rest. IMO, a structure like
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /stable/VERSION/<lang abbreviation>/etcetera
>>>>>>
>>>>>> were<lang abbreviation>   includes en-US at the same level
of all the
>>>>>> other localizations would be perfectly clear to anyone.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> This weird split complicates scripting operations on the tree.
>>>>>
>>>>> We could probably also eliminate the base of "/stable".  We don't
>>>>> release unstable code, do we?
>>>
>>> correct, and I think the schema that RGB currently proposes without the
>>> "/stable" is what Juergen basically proposed if memory serves.
>>> (I'm too lazy to go look for it. :/ )
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't know if it's wanted by us or allowed by ASF:
>>>>
>>>> We could release Beta versions or RCs in a different dir than stable/.
>>>>
>>>> Then it would make sense to keep it. Otherwise you are right.
>>>
>>> Right now, since we are not releasing "betas" and I don't see this
>>> happening in the future given the ASF definition of "release", we have
>>> no need for a "/stable" vs anything else.
>>
>> more or less but with going back to my proposal I think Rob made a good
>> proposal with some minimal but useful differentiation. The only thing I
>> woudl change is src = source because we already have it ;-)
>>
>> /ooo/<VERSION>/source
>> /ooo/<VERSION>/bin/<LANG>/
>> /ooo/<VERSION>/bin/SDK/
>
> It might be better to use "binaries".
> This is often used by ASF projects.
> It is plural because there are often multiple builds.
>
> It also cannot be confused with bin = wastebin.
> [In the US they use can == trashcan; the UK use bin == wastebin]
>
> Now -src and -bin are fine as part of a file name, but might be
> misinterpreted as a folder name.
>
> For developers, /bin/ has very different connotations (/usr/bin etc),
> but for end-users, they might be wary of downloading something that
> comes from what might as well be called:
>
> /ooo/<VERSION>/trash/
> or
> /ooo/<VERSION>/waste/
>
> Just a thought.

OK, understood. However, the goal is to point the normal, average 
enduser never to the raw mirror server, but only to some webpages they 
can click on. Here we can use longer, explaining text.

So, with this in mind it doesn't matter if you write "bin" or "binaries".

Of course, IMHO.

Marcus



>>>>> At a level higher we have another split, between source and binaries,
>>>>> where binaries are in "/files" and source is in VERSION.
>>>>>
>>>>> So:
>>>>>
>>>>> /ooo/3.4.1/source here
>>>>> /ooo/files/stable/de/3.4.1/binaries here
>>>>>
>>>>> This might  be harmonized as:
>>>>>
>>>>> /ooo/VERSION/src
>>>>> /ooo/VERSION/bin/LANG/
>>>>> /ooo/VERSION/bin/SDK
>>>
>>> yes. Hopefully Juergen will weigh in soonish.
>>>
>>
>> not really necessary, I think we are more or less all on the same track ;-)
>>
>> Juergen (who is moving slowly over in vacation mode)
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Or just
>>>>
>>>> /ooo/VERSION/
>>>>
>>>> to get the most flat structure.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe
>>>>
>>>> /ooo/VERSION/src/
>>>> /ooo/VERSION/bin/
>>>>
>>>> if it's needed to separate source and binary files.
>>>>
>>>> Marcus

Mime
View raw message