On Sunday 16 August 2015 23:36:33 Luigi Toscano wrote: > David Faure ha scritto: > > On Sunday 16 August 2015 13:51:29 Michael Pyne wrote: > >> There's no reason even with our current build metadata that we'd *have* to > >> have project hierarchies, as long as each underlying git repository name > >> remains unique. It might even make things easier since there would be no > >> way > >> for a sub-path in our project hierarchy (such as kde/kdelibs/kactivities) > >> to > >> mask a git repository name (kdelibs in this case). > > > > Ben and I discussed it today and we think there is usefulness in one level > > of subtree within the > > Applications product, to be able to keep the 'groups' like kdegraphics, > > kdemultimedia etc. which > > are useful in order to have a maintainer per 'group' (as reinforced by the > > release team recently). > > > > But yes, only one level, and AFAICS only useful in Applications. > > kactivities (to pick your example) would be "at the root of" Frameworks, no > > sub-path needed. > > > Does it mean a giant big blob for extragear and playground? Translation-wise, > having the 'groups' is really useful to not get lost. > > Also, when phabricator support subproject, using groups would be useful again > to not have a big blob of projects (it was one of the few complains I recorded > for phabricator, the big list of projects).
OK, so more products with repos organized in sub-paths, makes sense to me. -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE Frameworks 5 _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
