1 |
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 18:02, Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> wow, that explanation makes little sense to me |
3 |
|
4 |
that's exactly my problem too :-) Let's just forget about that. Both |
5 |
our wording seams to be unclear, however I think it is not really that |
6 |
relevant. What is relevant is that your description below allows my to |
7 |
understand your concerns. |
8 |
|
9 |
> apache.git with branches master host1 host2 host3 |
10 |
> postfix.git with branchnes master host1 host2... |
11 |
> |
12 |
> I think what you've proposed is |
13 |
> repo config.git with branches apache postfix bind |
14 |
|
15 |
No what I propose is to combine the two. Though I have to admit I |
16 |
wasn't clear on that |
17 |
|
18 |
$ git branch -a |
19 |
app-misc/foo/vanilla |
20 |
app-misc/foo/live |
21 |
app-misc/foo/some-experiment |
22 |
app-misc/foo/used-this-for-a-while |
23 |
app-misc/bar/vanilla |
24 |
app-misc/bar/live |
25 |
remotes/you/app-misc/foo/live |
26 |
remotes/you/app-misc/foo/test |
27 |
remotes/look-how-nicely-i-combined-foo-and-bar/app-misc/ffoo/the-way-to-go |
28 |
remotes/look-how-nicely-i-combined-foo-and-bar/app-misc/fbar/the-way-to-go |
29 |
remotes/look-how-nicely-i-combined-foo-and-bar/app-misc/fbar/if-that-did-not-work |
30 |
remotes/help-i-dont-now-how-this-works/app-misc/ffoo/live |
31 |
... |
32 |
|
33 |
> this doesn't work, why? you can't merge branches, branches are mostly |
34 |
> supposed to have similar content and be merge-able, they aren't |
35 |
> supposed to contain completely separate data, use different repo's for |
36 |
> that. |
37 |
|
38 |
With the above this works perfectly. |
39 |
|
40 |
>I don't consider the whole of config separate myself, like I |
41 |
> said, I think they are related by host, or even by type of box, one |
42 |
> could also define |
43 |
|
44 |
Do you not have for example documentation branches alongside the |
45 |
source branches? I think there are situations where it is okay to have |
46 |
"unrelated" branches in the same repository. This being one. |
47 |
|
48 |
> in fact the system should create config.git master should be stored |
49 |
> all the default configs |
50 |
|
51 |
That's how my current plan looks like. |
52 |
|
53 |
$ cfs sets |
54 |
@my-complete-configuration |
55 |
... |
56 |
@my-complete-configuration-without-packages-containing-private-data |
57 |
... |
58 |
@my-keyboard-related-stuff |
59 |
- sys-apps/baselayout |
60 |
- x11-misc/xkeyboard-config |
61 |
... |
62 |
@remotes/some-security-guru/secure-your-desktop |
63 |
+ net-firewall/shorewall |
64 |
- net-misc/tor |
65 |
... |
66 |
|
67 |
This would behave much like sets in portage. However when sets |
68 |
conflict things get complicated. cfs has to be able to resolve such a |
69 |
situation making it non-trivial. |
70 |
|
71 |
Does this make sense? |