25 Feb
2008
25 Feb
'08
6:03 a.m.
Hello devs,
I resurrect this thread, as I would like to check in a first version of
workspaces in the coming days.
I want to support Vincent's point on external tools. If we go for separate
SVNs, we should be able to have easily access to the same set of tools we
have on the main one now; and, ideally those tools should be centralized
(for example for fisheye it would mean still being able to see a changelog
cross products).
Although, wouldn't it be more painful to update dependencies for all
products after a release if we have to commit in different repos ?
WDYT ?
Regards,
Jerome.
On Jan 30, 2008, at 2:00 PM, Raffaello Pelagalli wrote:
Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
writes:
I've explained how to do it. Also this is working very fine in
Apache land so I really don't see this as a problem.
Hi,
We need to decide if we want to have a single SVN repository or
several. Right now we have 4:
- main xwiki: XE, XEM, Watch, Curriki
- chronopolys
- xwiki workspaces
- sandbox
I prefer to have a single one for the following reasons:
1) Simpler Admin
2) Consolidate history
3) Ability to move sources from one project to another. For example
the fact the sandbox is in a separate repo is a real pain since it's
not possible to perform a svn move so we loose the history when we
move things around
4) Complex to configure. You have to configure all your tools to
point
to several repos (IDE, etc)
5) Hard to configure external tools and no consolidated search,
stats,etc. For example: ohloh, sourcekibitzer
Note that Apache has a single repo for all its projects so it's not
like this is something that is weird and that hasn't been done
before.
To be honest I don't see a single advantage to have several repos.
However we would need to configure the SVN hooks to send svn commit
emails to different mailing lists and do the user authentication
based
on *.xwiki.org mapped to directories in SVN, but that's not a
problem.
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
Hi,
I think that it's normal to have separate repositories, at it is
separate projects.
Technicaly there is no problem if you want that xwiki committers can
commit on
all the projects (chrono, curriki, workspaces, sandbox, core,
etc ...).
The problem is : if you give some rights to someone for committing
on sandbox
he will be able to commit on the core if he wants ... Also, there is not only xwiki opensource
repositories on this
server, so we
will not change the authentication mechanism, at least not in very
near futur.
I don't understand what you mean here. Could you explain more?
So here is my -1 for the technical part and
another -1 for because I
really
think that different projects need to have different repositories :)
And finally here is my +1 to move Curriki, Watch, XE and XEM on
there own
repositories, which will be more consistent regarding the way we
manage
the different products on xwiki.org.
Right now the main argument you give is "it's normal to have separate
repositories". This sounds like a low argument compared to the ones
I've given :)
Could you please list specific advantages?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs