On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Mads Kiilerich <m...@kiilerich.com> wrote: > Steve Borho wrote, On 11/29/2009 08:09 PM: >>> >>> Maybe we should start thinking about somewhat separating shell >>> extension development and releases from the rest. >> >> Interesting. There is a pretty clear separation between the two halves >> of the project. hgtk from 0.8 could work with the shell extension of >> 0.9 and vice-versa. (If someone did want the cmenu fixes they could >> get the new ThgShell.dll from a nighly unstable build and copy it over >> their 0.9 install). >> >> This kind of goes hand-in-hand with the installer issues. If we moved >> to something more like WIX, I think we could manage the two parts >> independently. > > Would the nautilus plugin perhaps be the third half? (AFAIK it has very > little in common with the windows shell extension.)
It shares context menu names and the command line interface with hgtk, but that is about it. > For me the real and primary value in "tortoisehg" is in the "hgtk" part. The > windows shell integration "just" makes that power available to windows > users. I agree. > On Fedora I have organized it so that hgtk is provided by the "tortoisehg" > package, and the optional shell integration is provided by the > "tortoisehg-nautilus" package. FWIW, I would rather call the "hgtk" package > "hgtk"; that would be more descriptive as it really has very little (nothing > but history?) to do with the "tortoise" origin. I change my mind about this at least once a week. The "tortoisehg" installer provides a tortoisehg Python package and an hgtk executable. One could make a case for either name. In the end, I think we just want package a name that grows the user base. I'm guessing a new user would be more likely to install and tryout an tortoisehg package than an hgtk package because of name recognition. Of course, a new user is probably confused by the fact that the tortoisehg package installs an app named hgtk, but by now hgtk has quite a bit of name recognition among Mercurial users. Changing executable names now would probably be counterproductive. -- Steve Borho PS: Did you build 0.9 RPMs? I don't recall seeing any. At this point it's probably best to just build 0.9.1 packages on Tuesday. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Tortoisehg-develop mailing list Tortoisehg-develop@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tortoisehg-develop
