On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 09:37:45AM +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > On Wednesday, October 5, 2016 11:40:44 AM CEST Tim Flink wrote: > > I didn't notice that my reply went only to Pavel, resending to devel@ > > > > On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:25:46 +0200 > > Pavel Raiskup <praiskup@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Monday, October 3, 2016 1:50:33 PM CEST Tim Flink wrote: > > > > https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/w/taskotron/new_distgit_task_storage_proposal/ > > > > ... > > > > Please read through the wiki page I mentioned above and give us > > > > feedback on whether what we're planning to implement is going to be > > > > useful > > > > > > Useful, yes! > > > > > > > or if there are areas of the plan which could be improved. > > > > > > Can we rather make the ./taskotron directory separate git submodule? > > > I expect that I'm going to play with that directory a lot, without > > > being "that much careful" as I'm with package directories; which > > > might mean that for packaging work there might be a bit unpleasant > > > rush in git-log otherwise. > > > > I'd rather avoid git submodules and subtrees because that's a lot of > > extra complexity to make sure that the various pointers are updated at > > the correct times. > > I disagree with extra complexity. Sub-tree sounds like something which is > terribly important -- so we can have separate ACLs for package and tests, > I don't have to bother package maintainers when I develop tests ... etc. > > And when we talk about sub-tree, git submodules bring *a lot* of control > over sub-trees *for free*. There's something like `git submodule update > --init --recursive` (could be done by 'fedpkg clone'?). > > Simply you can develop subtree without touching "parent", and once you are > ready -- you just update hash. Also one sub-trees (test directories) can > be shared among packages (and not being able to share some testcases among > several packages would be 99% show-stopper for me). > > > I think that a better alternative to putting checks into the same > > dist-git repo as packaging information would be to have differently > > namespaced git repos (eg checks-rpms/libfoo for rpms/libfoo) and > > enhance fedpkg to work with that second repository to make it look like > > a subdirectory even though it's a separate git repo. > > I'm not against it, as I'm not going to hack that :) but this is a lot of > expensive complexity, when submodules are here clearly for this purpose. And are you going to hack on submodules? (both as user and to help infra getting it set-up?) Pierre _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
