1 |
On 06-08-2011 16:17:32 -0400, James Cloos wrote: |
2 |
> Your idea is a step in the right direction, but the ideal config would |
3 |
> have a top level portage.git with sub-modules for each category, as well |
4 |
> as for eclass, licenses, profiles and scripts. Each category.git should |
5 |
> have sub-modules for each package therein. |
6 |
|
7 |
I believe the size of a repo (how much it contains) should depend on |
8 |
what it is. Some packages (like e.g. Mutt) live very well on their own, |
9 |
I understand larger projects like GNOME and KDE prefer to have many |
10 |
sub-components in one repo. |
11 |
|
12 |
I don't necessarily think there should be a clear hierarchy, although |
13 |
subtrees may require that. |
14 |
|
15 |
> Within the profiles.git it *might* be reasonable for each directory in |
16 |
> arch/ also to be a sub-modules. Or not. That should be dicussed. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> And the bureaucracy should be minimal. Adding, changing or removing a |
19 |
> submodule from its parent repo should only require a call for consensus |
20 |
> among the devs, and not be pushed through a small set of devs on some |
21 |
> given team. |
22 |
|
23 |
Currently, all devs can add and remove (with notice) packages, so I |
24 |
don't see why that would require a consensus with this model, suddenly. |
25 |
|
26 |
> It may also be useful for the process which generates metadata/ to push |
27 |
> out to a repo, too, just before syncing out to the rsync mirrors. |
28 |
|
29 |
I don't understand what you mean by this. Can you elaborate? |
30 |
|
31 |
> Having each package in its own repo is a great idea. But a simple |
32 |
> recursive git pull to update the whole thing is highly desireable. |
33 |
> Git submodules fit the bill perfectly. |
34 |
|
35 |
I assumed something like this possible to be able to get "all" easily or |
36 |
something. |
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
Fabian Groffen |
41 |
Gentoo on a different level |