Public SourceMage Discussion List

["Jeremy Blosser (emrys)" <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>]

On Apr 05, Seth Alan Woolley [seth AT positivism.org] wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 01:03:42PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser (emrys) wrote:
> > 1) As already suggested, continue to sort the grimoire by a taxonomy, but
> >    add a MAINTAINER back to individual spells.  The section maintainer 
> > wins
> >    if the spell doesn't have one, but if the spell has one it wins.  Then
> >    go a step farther and create some guru-tools that make it easy for
> >    maintainers to grab just their own spells into a work area and go from
> >    there.  This is the right place for new tools, stuff that just
> >    maintainers have to worry about.  This avoids the turnover problem as
> >    well and is probably the right way to do it if we can figure out what
> >    tools we need for the maintainers.
> 
> We got rid of MAINTAINERS for a reason -- they were never accurate.

Hrm, this should tell us something.  :-)

> > 2) We could go ahead and sort the grimoire by maintainer, but do it like
> >    this:
> > 
> >    jeremy_blosser/mail-daemons/
> >    jeremy_blosser/mail-clients/
> >    jeremy_blosser/shell-utils/
> > 
> >    So each maintainer has their own area, but under that area it's still
> >    sorted a globally-defined way.  People who maintain a ton of spells are
> >    going to want that kind of organization eventually anyway.
> > 
> >    Then we add an extra layer of logic to the tarball-building scripts or
> >    sorcery so that when users grab grimoires or web indexes are created,
> >    the maintainer part of the path gets stripped.  They still just end up
> >    with mail-daemons/, shell-utils/, etc.  If we needed we could have
> >    scripts stuff the maintainer path info back into each spell as a
> >    MAINTAINER variable as well so userspace can tell who maintains what.
> >    Regardless, the point is that the maintainer-based sectioning is *only*
> >    useful to maintainers and the backends, and is directly *not* useful to
> >    users, so it should only be visible to maintainers and the backend.
> >    That requires some work, but we're clever people here.  Again, this is
> >    the right kind of place to spend the time creating new tools.  This
> >    would still have a lot of turnover, though.
> 
> I like this method except it relies upon our treating maintainers as
> separate grimoires when we edit spells as developers in perforce.  That
> might not be a bad way of doing it.

I'm not sure what you mean.  This wouldn't mean we keep the current 2 tier
system and replace grimoire with maintainer, it would mean stuffing a new
maintainer division in between grimoire and section, or alternately I guess
doing maintainer/grimoire/section to let maintainers have full flexibility
on their own dev/test/etc. systems.  In any case it'd mean making
everything in the system play nice with it.  (This probably gives Andrew
palpitations, but again, I'm not really in favor of this one, primarily
because of all the spell moving it would periodically require.)

Attachment: pgpcY4iJDYGvn.pgp
Description: PGP signature