Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-15 Thread Eric S. Raymond
[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

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-15 Thread me
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

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-14 Thread Eric S. Raymond
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

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-12 Thread Bruno Wolff III
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

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-12 Thread ott
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

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-11 Thread Bruno Wolff III
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

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-11 Thread Nils Kneuper
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

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-11 Thread Bruno Wolff III
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.

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-11 Thread Bruno Wolff III
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

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-11 Thread jeremy rosen
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

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-11 Thread John McNabb
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

[Wesnoth-dev] Directory objects -- proposed change in preprocessor behavior

2007-05-11 Thread Eric S. Raymond
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