< Projects
Revision as of 20:50, 8 September 2010 by Chani (talk | contribs) (initial documentation of modules vs split)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)



modules: -each SC module is one repository. -each extragear application is one repository. -kdereview and playground are implemented with individual repos and/or branches? -tarballs??

split: -each SC application is one repository. -kdelibs and pimlibs are one repo each. kdebase is split how? -extragear and review/playground as above. -tarballs??


Pros for each option (cons are rephrased as a pro for the other one) Note: no mention of the magnitude of each point has been made yet.


modules: -some work has already been done on creating module repos -moves within modules can be ignored



modules: -less projects to choose from when submitting a patch? [web only, not an issue with post-review] -no namespacing issue

split: -if something moves to another module, no changes are needed

comments: -the reviewer groups won't be affected


modules: -no namespacing issue

split: -source code links are automatically available on each applicaton page, instead of the module page


modules: -no namespacing issue

split: -easier to find projects


modules: -projects can keep their interdependencies, module-wide libraries and so on -less server space

split: -moving a project (eg. to unmaintained) moves its whole history

user workflow

modules: -keeps a sense of community by having a whole module kept together -increases passive testing of trunk (more people to notice if the build's broken) -lower barrier to hacking on other projects in the module -easier to refactor a module [rare] -less downloading & disk space for those who want entire modules

split: -less downloading & disk space for people who only want a small part of a module -easier to get started on one little app? -easier to avoid being exposed to unstable versions of other projects [I think that's a bit selfish though]

comments: -kdesrc-build, build-tool and mr make it easy to handle large numbers of repos, although there's still room for improvement on userfriendliness.


modules: -closer to what we have with svn??


Content is available under Creative Commons License SA 4.0 unless otherwise noted.