[zander at kde.org: Re: [Kde-scm-interest] Project layout on gitorious]
apaku at gmx.de
Mon Mar 29 20:13:38 UTC 2010
On 29.03.10 21:51:44, Niko Sams wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 00:53, Andreas Pakulat <apaku at gmx.de> wrote:
> > On 28.03.10 21:09:45, Niko Sams wrote:
> >> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 20:58, Andreas Pakulat <apaku at gmx.de> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > seems we might have to merge our rule files a bit differently, please
> >> > see below.
> >> Please elaborate on this. Do you mean the repository name?
> > No, the mail I sent was about the layout of projects. Apparently the
> > understanding among the kde-scm group so far was that each rule file
> > gets its own project on the gitorious server and all repositories that
> > the rule file creates are going to be repositories in that
> > gitorious-project.
> > That doesn't fit with what we've "settled" (well, discussion somehow
> > died) on for kdevplatform, kdevelop, quanta and the maintained plugins.
> > I'm not sure yet in what way this really affects us (i.e. wether we
> > really need to merge parts of the files into 1 kdevelop file), as we're
> > going to move before the "big masses" and hence have control over the
> > process and how we split stuff.
> I think it won't be a problem to have one project from multiple rule
> files or the
> other way around. Especially not for the few repositories we have.
Not on a technical level, no. But apparently the "design" behind the
rules file was thought to be different. Anyway as I said, it probably
won't affect us.
> That layout would mean one KDevelop project that contains repositories
> for kdevelop, kdevplatform,
> kdevelop-php(?), kdevelop-php-docs(?), kdevelop-upload(?)
> And one Quanta project that contains quanta and?
The last proposal I sent was:
To separate web-development stuff a bit from the C++ ide. I didn't get
any further comments on that (if you want to comment, please do so in
the related thread (project layout on gitorious.org)).
Apart from that, having just 1 repo in a project is very common, many
projects have only 1 repo.
> How would this layout work together with the playground -> kdereview
> -> kdevelop moves
> for plugins?
Actually that is still completely open. There's been 2 or 3 ideas how
kdereview-process will be handled but nothing definitive. Though it
seems most are in favour of kdereview becoming simply a wiki-page or
something. I'm not sure how importing a git repo including its history
as subdir of an existing repo, but I've seen a page suggesting its
Your best consolation is the hope that the things you failed to get weren't
really worth having.
More information about the KDevelop-devel