On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 05:13:53 +0000 MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo....@samsung.com> wrote:
> >On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 04:51:03 +0000 > >MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo....@samsung.com> wrote: > > > >> > On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 04:29:28 +0000 > >> > MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo....@samsung.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > what we do in enlightenment upstream is we literally rename > >> > "dead" repositories. we also mark them clearly in description: > >> > > >> > https://git.enlightenment.org/ > >> > > >> > look at "Legacy". we do this so code is available if someone > >> > wants to dig through it, but it: > >> > > >> > 1. is clear by description and/or PATH to git repo that its > >> > legacy (old/dead). > >> > 2. it will force good old build scripts to break - thus informing > >> > whoever runs such tools by way of their build breaking that > >> > things have moved/changed. > >> > > >> > so i agree that it'd be good to rename and change descriptions > >> > when a repository is abandoned. we should reduce the number of > >> > repos perhaps in the process. > >> > >> Renaming may incur problems with build processes targetting old > >> Tizen versions. > >> > >> I wish we've never renamed any active git repositories; but we've > >> already committed such sins. Therefore, there are a lot of git > >> repos that are used by some build projects while not supposed to > >> get any attention from code writers. > >> > >> Thus, renaming (or moving) git repos might need some aliasing > >> (e.g., symbolic links) so that developers might be able to > >> distinguish them quickly while obsolete build systems (for > >> obsolete projects) may keep access them. > > > >if the code is no longer maintained, worked on, patched, fixed etc... > >shouldn't it break old builds? shouldn't the people doing the build > >know that this is now an orphaned repository and no one is going to > >look after it? > > For example, can you identify whether it's deactivated or not by > simply looking at it? (it's dead now.) > https://review.tizen.org/gerrit/gitweb?p=apps/core/preloaded/quickpanel.git;a=summary > > If app/core/preloaded/quickpanel is renamed as > DEAD/app/corea/preloaded/quickpanel, I'm happy with it. > > However, the build systems that tries to get Tizen 3.0 or 2.x will be > broken. That's what I'm concerned with simply renaming/moving dead > packages. (And that's why I though aliasing/symlinks for them might > be needed) > > And, I do not want to break old (at least for 3.0) builds. (not > personal builds, but the builds at build.tizen.org). ok. well tizen 3 isn't old.. :) i was thinking tizen 2.0 or 1.0 ... there is also a description that gerrit lists next to the repo when you list repositories. that description could begin with "LEGACY |" or "MOVEDTO xxxx |" or "DEAD |" so a quick look at the repo in gerrit would tell you what you need. also perhaps add a "DEAD.txt" file in the base of the git repo would be a clear sign. it could contain information as to what to do (move to a new repo url, never use this software again as it's obsolete etc.). if the code in the repo is REALLY dead and going to be ignored from now on... a move is a good idea. :) if we're just talking about tizen 3 then that's far from legacy at this point :) _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@lists.tizen.org https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
