[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: procfs, separate repo?

From: Richard Braun
Subject: Re: procfs, separate repo?
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 21:19:12 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 12:59:47PM +0700, Ivan Shmakov wrote:
> >>>>> Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@gnu.org> writes:
>  > Should we keep procfs in a separate repository, or merge it into the
>  > main hurd repository?
>  > Generally enough, did we write a guideline somewhere as to what
>  > should be in the main hurd repository, or should be separate?
>       Given that Git has support submodules, but not (AIUI) for
>       repository merging and splitting, my opinion would be to keep
>       all but the bare minimum off the main Hurd repository.
>       There could be a kind of hurd-full.git repository, which has all
>       the relevant submodules' configuration to tie all the Hurd
>       repositories together, though.

Unless it's very easy to use submodules, we should use one repository.
Other projects with much more content and history have showed it's
perfectly sane to keep that much in one place, and it simplifies keeping
the tightly coupled modules of the Hurd in sync.

Richard Braun

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]