RFC for Version Control Plugins handling ...

[Yann Hodique]

Hi Mario,

> I don't know anything of perforce or clearcase but no 
> user will never be able to use them in the application wizard!

hmm, well the user won't be able to use them as long as there is no "globalperforce", etc. I wouldn't say never :-)
The reason why the code doesn't exist is that I don't use these systems and nobody else ever cared about that ;-)
If you create a "global" plugin for perforce or clearcase, it will be used by the wizard (if not, this is a bug :-p).
 
> What I propose is:
> - - merging parts/cvs/globalcvs and parts/cvs functionality wise
> (globalcvs 
> seems not complete anyway), ultimately removing parts/cvs/globacvs 
> from 
> codebase.
> - - if plugin scope's concept must be retained then parts/clearcase, 
> parts/cvs 
> and parts/perforce must have "X-KDevelop-Scope=Global" so that they 
> can be 
> used from the wizard all at once. 
> Having them on "Project" scope makes them 
> not usable or simply require over-complex coding (anyway the user 
> should be 
> able to unload the vcs he doesnt use from Settings->Plugins dialog).

I don't agree. Version systems really have 2 sides (from kdevelop point of view) : one outside the project (creation), and one inside (commit/update/what_ya_want)
In addition, splitting in 2 parts makes some things easier. For example I want to be able to create a CVS-based project, but when I'm working on a Subversion-based one, I really don't want to have the CVS stuff in context menu... Of course this problem can be solved another way, but it seems more natural to me to have 2 plugins, and in fact I don't see a reason why it would be better to have only one.
I'm not sure the Scope notion is a good thing in general, but this is another problem :-)

> - - (about KDevGlobalVersionControl Vs KDevVersionControl) the latter > should be retained since (1) it used in more header and so 
> modifications should impact 
> on less modules and (2) the name is just-what-it-means. The killed one > should 
> be merged in KDevVersionControl.

If I'm right, the KDevVersionControl is not used at all, except in interfaces ;-)

> Future improvements:
> - - vcs should have actions associated, so that they can be embedded 
> in the user interface (menu, toolbar?)
> - - I'd like to further investigate if KParts::Plugin is useful for 
> our needs. 
> Any idea about this?
> - - all vcs should heir from KDevVersionControl instead of KDevPlugin 
> directly 

Strongly agree!

> Please provide feedback about these (well, personally i'd like to know > from hodique or harald about the globalcvs and if I'm right about it 

You've got one of the two :-)

Bye,
Yann