On 8/6/13 4:18 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote: > Currently all the library archives are stored in SVN and if we simply convert > it > to Git anyone cloning the repository would have to download all the libs ever > checked in (unless using git clone --depth which imposes other limitations). > Handling binary files is not exactly where Git shines. There is a > separate project, > git-annex to support using Git helping file storage, but Windows support is > not > perfect according to the project's page [1]. > > Regarding the libraries I think it would probably be enough to use a > downloadable > .zip file containing a snapshot of the needed Windows libraries > instead of cloning > a Subversion/Git repository to the machine. The scripts maintaining the > snapshot > could be stored in Git, of course, but I'm not sure if rethinking the > library installation > should happen before moving the main codebase to Gerrit.
Good point. Ultimately I'd like to get out of the third party package business. At Sharkfest Graham mentioned that Nuget (http://www.nuget.org/) is starting to gain popularity as a way to package development libraries for Windows. I'm hoping we can migrate from what we currently have to a set of scripts that generate packages and upload them to Nuget.org. > I think simply creating a sandbox repository of Wireshark's source in > Gerrit would give > developers a good opportunity to try the workflow and we can delete > the sandbox and > make the switch after enough developers are confident with it. Agreed. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
