On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 3:37 PM, RGB ES <rgb.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/8/23 Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com>: >> Way back in late April, Juergen proposed a new directory structure for >> release packs than what we have now which is essentially: >> >> /stable/VERSION/<en-US items> >> /localized/<lang abbreviation>/VERSION/<lang items> >> >> there are some other areas in SF as well and I don't know if they're still >> being used >> >> Could we restart the discussion, or just again send the proposed structure, >> on what the "ideal" structure would look like so we could get to work on >> modifying the download scripts? Thanks. >> >> >> -- >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> MzK >> >> "As a child my family's menu consisted of two choices: >> take it or leave it. " >> -- Buddy Hackett > > Warning: Layman comment following. > > Even if en-US is the base for all the other builds, I see no need to > completely separate it from the rest. IMO, a structure like > > /stable/VERSION/<lang abbreviation>/etcetera > > were <lang abbreviation> includes en-US at the same level of all the > other localizations would be perfectly clear to anyone. >
+1 This weird split complicates scripting operations on the tree. We could probably also eliminate the base of "/stable". We don't release unstable code, do we? At a level higher we have another split, between source and binaries, where binaries are in "/files" and source is in VERSION. So: /ooo/3.4.1/source here /ooo/files/stable/de/3.4.1/binaries here This might be harmonized as: /ooo/VERSION/src /ooo/VERSION/bin/LANG/ /ooo/VERSION/bin/SDK -Rob > Regards > Ricardo
