[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into
From: |
c. |
Subject: |
Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core |
Date: |
Wed, 29 Jan 2014 06:41:42 +0100 |
On 29 Jan 2014, at 00:41, Carnë Draug <address@hidden> wrote:
> Is there any way to move a file between two
> different hg repositories, while keeping its history?
While I'm sure our HG guru will find a trick to accomplish this task, I can't
help but
point out how this issue shows why your approach to managing the package
contents is
inconsistent:
- On the one hand, you created separate repositories for each package to
make their maintainance more indepent and decentralized, and to allow even
development to happen outside Octave Forge as in ltfat.
- On the other hand you keep moving around functions from one place to another
and making "interventions" on their contents as if OctaveForge were one single
package, and you its maintainer.
So if we really want to go back to something closer to the "monolithic"
distribution approach,
which I actually don't but I keep seeing you drifting towards that with time,
then I suggest to
do the following:
- change the name of "miscellaneous" to "cruft" [1] and use it as a collector
for all leftovers
from deprecated/unmaintained/buggy/dodgy packages that we don't feel like
throwing away
completely but we don't expect many users to actually need in real life.
That would include stuff like @dict, of which none of us actually understands
the purpose,
or "solvesudoku" which is a cool programming example but not really meant for
everyday use.
I would make it a strict rule that NO package should ever be made dependent
on "cruft".
- change the name of "general" to "standard-additions" [2] and use it for any
useful little functions
that do not belong into any other package but are useful for everyday use or
are dependencies for
other packages.
This would include stuff like @InputParser or physicalconstants.
What do you think?
c.
[1] Other names would also be possible but as we have liboctave/cruft in core
it would
make sense to me to use the same in forge.
[2] I'm notoriously not good at choosing names, so feel free to propose a
different one.
This one has an history though as it was the name of the an extra disk that
came with
some versions of MacOS Classic, containing all stuff that was not essential
for the
system but that anyone with sufficient disk space was expected to install.
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, c., 2014/01/27
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, Olaf Till, 2014/01/27
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, c., 2014/01/27
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, c., 2014/01/27
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, Olaf Till, 2014/01/27
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, Carnë Draug, 2014/01/28
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, c., 2014/01/28
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, c., 2014/01/28
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core,
c. <=
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, Olaf Till, 2014/01/30
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, John W. Eaton, 2014/01/30
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, Olaf Till, 2014/01/31
- Message not available
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, c., 2014/01/27
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, c., 2014/01/29
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, Thomas Weber, 2014/01/29
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, c., 2014/01/29
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, Thomas Weber, 2014/01/23
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, c., 2014/01/24
- Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core, c., 2014/01/23