Randa: GIT migration plan for KDE Multimedia

[ian.monroe at gmail.com]

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 14:01, Harald Sitter <sitter at kde.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 8:40 PM, ian.monroe at gmail.com
> <ian.monroe at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 13:35, Harald Sitter <sitter at kde.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 7:18 PM, ian.monroe at gmail.com
>>> <ian.monroe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:02, Harald Sitter <sitter at kde.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 5:59 PM, ian.monroe at gmail.com
>>>>> <ian.monroe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> What about the idea of combining all the non-applications
>>>>>> subdirectories into a single project? Would make the dep tree easier,
>>>>>> and they are all really small anyways.
>>>>>
>>>>> That would mean that we need to move unmaintained stuff out of the
>>>>> repos, thus have to do hardcore fiddeling with the history.
>>>>
>>>> Why does it mean that?
>>>
>>> Because shipping broken and unmaintained software results in bad
>>> public perception of KDE and particularly our multimedia apps.
>>
>> Well I mean, can't we just delete (git rm) the unmaintained software
>> from my hypothetical combined non-app repo. Or not convert it in the
>> first place. I don't see how having separate repos changes anything in
>> regards to this issue.
>
> That does not safe us from software dying later or getting introduced
> later and then die after that. At any rate having later disappearing
> software in the history is nothing but ewww. If every application/lib
> is in their own repo we can just demote/promote states without every
> touching git, elevating the whole process from technical work to
> management work (of sorts).

You would be correct if we were talking about massive histories, but
we're not. This is small stuff.

>>>>> So we
>>>>> might as well split proper. It does not make much difference whether
>>>>> we expand to 5 or 13 repos really.
>>>>
>>>> Well people complain a lot, see the latest thread on release-team. I
>>>> think making the dep tree very simple is a good thing and not hard to
>>>> do.
>>>
>>> It was pointed out by fedora and kubuntu packagers that it makes much
>>> sense to have kdemm split.
>>
>> Yea I don't really understand whats going on with that thread.
>
> No idea, svuorela also thinks splitting is a good thing in general, so
> that adds Debian to the supporters :P

Tell him to join in! And you too! So far its a big "you upstreamers
don't understand the pain of being downstream, spec files are hard
lets go shopping" etc etc.

Ian