I agree with Martin here, I see no benefit in merging gtk in. Schanzenbach, Martin transcribed 4.6K bytes: > As an example: Look at how large projects like GNOME are developed. > Nobody would even dare to put _everything_ in a single repository. That would > be preposterous. > The only project I could think of that takes such an approach is systemd. > I know that you grothoff despise this project especially and while I actually > think they have VALID arguments in doing so, GNUnet does not. > > > On 8. Feb 2019, at 15:00, Schanzenbach, Martin <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > Yes, I do not think this is a good idea at all and is contrary to the > > initial motivation of this thread. > > > > We already agree the from a user perspective, the packages (.deb/.rpm et > > al) should ideally be split into > > the respective services/applications and, of course, also Gtk+. For sane > > dependency resolution at least. > > > > But it is also reasonable to separate things at source level as I already > > gave various reasons, to which I have not heard a counterargument yet > > except: > > Usability (???). > > You cannot argue with usability because USERS DO NOT INSTALL FROM THE GIT > > REPO THEY INSTALL PACKAGES. > > And even the packages should be separate as you already agreed! > > > > A monolith _will_ bite us when it comes to testing and CI. > > Working on a single, huge codebase with a variety of build switches is a > > pain for testing, development and deployment. > > Not to mention it is difficult to ascertain and ensure for an application > > what components are built. > > Example: Do you really want to test everthing of the core gnunet functions > > if a Gtk widget changes? > > Because that will inevitably happen. > > It will be really difficult to setup a CI/automated testing that correctly > > separates this. > > It will be possible, maybe, but then we have a test process that is equally > > difficult as our build process. > > > > > >> On 8. Feb 2019, at 14:39, Christian Grothoff <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> On 2/7/19 3:21 PM, Hartmut Goebel wrote: > >>> Am 02.02.19 um 16:09 schrieb Christian Grothoff: > >>>> And I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to have the gnunet.git > >>>> configure.ac test for Gtk+ and *if* libgtk is detected, _then_ build Gtk > >>>> GUIs that are _included_ in gnunet.git, instead of requiring the user to > >>>> download and configure yet another TGZ. > >>> > >>> *If* the gui is merged into the main repo, I suggest adding > >>> configure-options like `--without-gui`(which AFAIK is a autotools > >>> standard thing) to avoid building the gui even if libgtk is detected. > >>> This might happen if e.g. one is developing on her/his desktop. > >> > >> Sure, that makes sense. Any opinions from the silent masses on merging > >> gnunet-gtk.git into gnunet.git and merging the source TGZs? > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> GNUnet-developers mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers > > >
> _______________________________________________ > GNUnet-developers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ GNUnet-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
