G'day all,
my 2c, from a lurker.
Quoting Charles Steinkuehler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > David, Do you agree with Charles? Should we put the scripts on CVS,
> > > or do you have another idea?
> >
> > I'm not sure what you all mean by "the scripts." As Charles noted, I
[...]
> > Are these the scripts you all are talking about?
IMHO, everything should be put into CVS, including webpages and documentation.
CVS gives you a revision history and backup archive. This is indespensible for
any data that you want to keep and/or modify (nearly all data :-).
> Yes, along with several others.
>
> > Also, to me, "source" is C code to things like syslogd, GNU sed,
> > busybox, tinylogin, et al.... these scripts would be in the base,
> > wouldn't they?
>
> They would be part of a base distribution, yes.
These things should be revision controlled upstream. There should be no need to
include these in the Leaf CVS unless there are Leaf specific modifications
being made to them.
If there are Leaf specific mods being made to upstream sources, then I would
checkin the upstream sources as a branch called something like "orig", and
checkin the modified stuff under a different branch. That way you should be
able to checkin and merge with new upstream releases further down the track.
[...]
> One major issue is exactly how to structure things: i.e. are your
> heavily
> modified scripts a branch from 2.9.[7|8] or a new tree?
I would checkin each different variant as different branches, and then slowly
work towards merging them all in the future. This would probably be easiest if
you checkin the earliest common root, then branch and checkin the others in the
order and pedigree that they happend. Merges tend to work cleaner if they have
a common parent that is actualy representative. It might pay to draw an
inheritance tree for all the variants first to make this easier.
> Maybe this is all overkill for a handful of shell scripts, but since
[...]
revision control is never overkill :-)
Disclaimer: I am more familiar with PRCS than CVS, and PRCS's merge facilities
might be more advanced than CVS's. In any case, the concepts and objectives
should be the same, even if the tool doesn't make it as easy as it should.
--
ABO: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more information.
_______________________________________________
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/leaf-devel
