Public SourceMage Discussion List

["David C. Haley" <dhaley AT tamsco.com>]

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:58:44 -0500
"Jeremy Blosser (emrys)" <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org> wrote:

> Sorry to keep replying to my own posts but this idea is growing on me the
> more I think about it.
> 
> On Apr 05, Jeremy Blosser (emrys) [jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org] wrote:
> > Does this make sense?  Basically we do exactly what we do now, but we 
> > clean
> > up and standardize the grimoire sections some and let the general gurus
> > have their own grimoire-level area in p4 and request specific spells they
> > want to maintain be assigned to them there.  This requires basically no
> > changes to what we conceptually have now but allows for what I think you
> > guys are after.  As main maintainer I'm already farming out the MTAs to
> > those that use them, I would love it if I could actually let them take it
> > this way but still be able to track the level of QC they're getting.
> ...
> > 
> > Also, one modifications on this would be to make some tools so they don't
> > actually move the spell from devel to their grimoire, they just somehow
> > mark it there (like scribbler but in a way that supports p4 and what we
> > need).  I'm not sure if we actually need this, though.
> 
> Actually, this is something else we'd leave up to the section maintainers.
> If I want to actually *give* maintainence of sendmail to swoolley (for
> example), we move it from devel/mail to seth_woolley/mail (p4 integ, p4
> delete), and he integrates it from seth_woolley/mail to test/mail.  If I
> prefer that I see/review the changes going through my section, I just allow
> him to take a copy (p4 integ, no delete) and then he integrates from
> seth_woolley/mail to devel/mail and I'm responsible for reviewing and
> integrating it to test from there.  This could of course be mixed and
> matched at the section or even spell level depending on what the section
> maintainers wanted for oversight for given spells (or given developers,
> heh).

I rather like this idea. though I am curious about something. I remember 
reading earlier in this long thread about source tree that is on p4 and the 
build tree that resides on the machine. I know that I am misunderstanding it, 
and have probably missed something. But, these changes that are being 
proposed to teh structure are they for the source tree, the build tree, or 
both?

forgive me if this is layman questions, but I am just trying to get my head 
around all that is being propsed. From what I see above it would seem that 
the maintaner ideas would only effect how things are handled on the p4 side 
of things and that the look of the build tree would stay unchanged. At least 
that is what I have gathered from this so far.


Regards,
SilverS

> 
> 
> Someone please hurry up and tell me what's fundamentally wrong with this
> whole idea as well before I get attached to it.  :-)

---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]