[Kde-scm-interest] Sysadmin advice regarding Monolithic vs Split repositories.

Christoph Cullmann cullmann at absint.de
Tue Sep 7 22:16:15 CEST 2010


On Tuesday 07 September 2010 21:38:00 Chani wrote:
> On September 7, 2010 11:35:28 Christoph Cullmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 07 September 2010 18:04:40 Tom Albers wrote:
> > > The sysadmin team would like to setup the services real soon now, so we
> > > ask this list to come up with a final decision about the setup. To be
> > > clear: whatever you decide, we will implement it to the best of our
> > > capabilities.
> > 
> > I agree on the general direction, the split approach just makes it much
> > more easy for people working on individual apps to contribute by avoiding
> > to clone everything.
> > 
> > For Kate for example that still would mean to split out the part and
> > ktexteditor interfaces from kdelibs, which is already done in the
> > gitorious kate repo, which bundles part/app/kwrite and ktexteditor
> > interfaces for the part.
> 
> the way I read it, that wasn't part of the sysadmins' proposal; kdelibs was
> to be kept intact.
I never said it was in their proposal to do so.
But if we want to migrate the current kate gitorious repo, that needs to be 
done that way.

Greetings
Christoph


More information about the Kde-scm-interest mailing list