[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> why is "core" stuff inside the campaigns folder?
Because, in this draft of the reorganization, the 'campaigns'
folder really becomes a 'packages' folder with the name
'campaigns' kept for backwards compatibility.
Layout reproduced for reference:
> wesnoth
why is "core" stuff inside the campaigns folder?
On May 14, 2007, at 11:39 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Personally I think it would make sense to require each campaign to
be completely self-contained. A more complex alternative would be
to designate some conten
Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Personally I think it would make sense to require each campaign to
> > be completely self-contained. A more complex alternative would be
> > to designate some content (as opposed to campaigns) as core.
>
> I would think the core is anything in data except
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 12:23:54 +0200,
ott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III,
>
> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 01:36:21PM -0500, you wrote:
> > If references were only allowed within
> > a campaign or to main line stuff and not cross campaign, we could make sure
> > that removing a campai
Bruno Wolff III,
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 01:36:21PM -0500, you wrote:
> If references were only allowed within
> a campaign or to main line stuff and not cross campaign, we could make sure
> that removing a campaign will not break another campaign because of
> dependencies. This could enforce the
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 21:14:36 +0200,
Nils Kneuper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III schrieb:
> > I have thought of something else that might be nice to do after each
> > campaign is in its own directory. If references were only allowed within
> > a campaign or to main line stuff and
Bruno Wolff III schrieb:
> I have thought of something else that might be nice to do after each
> campaign is in its own directory. If references were only allowed within
> a campaign or to main line stuff and not cross campaign, we could make sure
> that removing a campaign will not break another
I have thought of something else that might be nice to do after each
campaign is in its own directory. If references were only allowed within
a campaign or to main line stuff and not cross campaign, we could make sure
that removing a campaign will not break another campaign because of
dependencies.
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 13:34:31 -0400,
"Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> After staring at the layout for a while, I think one source of
> grubbiness is that we've used directories to create a sort of
> half-baked package structure without making them package objects.
> The way ca
yes, this sounds good
Eric, you might want to discuss your project specifically with the
guys from Spacenoth/SoS since they try to redo the whole directory
structure and might be interested to provide their input in such a
project...
On 5/11/07, John McNabb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sounds re
Sounds reasonable to me.
On 5/11/07, Eric S. Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some of you know that, with encouragement from other devs, I'm doing a
> cleanup and reorganization of the Wesnoth directory layout. The immediate
> motivation is to make correct behavior easier for tools like wmlsc
Some of you know that, with encouragement from other devs, I'm doing a
cleanup and reorganization of the Wesnoth directory layout. The immediate
motivation is to make correct behavior easier for tools like wmlscope
and wmllint, but there are long-standing issues about our data layout
beneath these
12 matches
Mail list logo
