Re: [Libreoffice] build or rawbuild dir?

On 01/11/10 14:13, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> On 2010-11-01 at 09:36 +0100, Sebastian Spaeth wrote:
>
> > > The idea is to forget the 'build' repository in the normal process, and
> > > let it only for the documentation, and for the distro maintainers - if
> > > they need it at all.  'bootstrap' would become the new main repo, and
> > > would have the following layout:
> > May I chime in again? Sorry for being pedantic, but I want it done right
> > before we are got stuck in another "historical reasons" situation.
> More than 'historical reasons', we are stuck here in 'how we want to
> have that organized when everything is settled down' :-)
>
> The ideal we are heading to is that all the repos are on the same level,
> and buildable separately.  I mean, eg. the 'writer' repo should not be
> in some subdir of 'bootstrap', but in the same one:
>
> /bootstrap
> /artwork
> /libs-gui
> ...
> /writer

And can we call the parent of these directories something like
"libreoffice", not something completely generic and meaningless like
"build".

I've got a directory called ~/gitstuff. I've got a lilypond clone in
there called "lilypond". I've got a git clone in there called "git". But
when I clone libreoffice (as per the website instructions) I end up with
a libreoffice clone called "build"! So I have to create a directory
called loffice to put build in, which messes up all my directory levels!


> Why not to rename 'bootstrap' to a new 'build'?  Renaming repos is a
> PITA - consider someone that has the current 'build' repo, and pulls
> from freedestkop after having 'bootstrap' renamed to 'build' - he'd get
> terrible conflicts and git warnings; worse - he could resolve them,
> merge, and push back, which would get all the 'build' history into what
> is now 'bootstrap' - something that we really don't want :-(
>
> Either way - what I'd recommend it actually to clone 'bootstrap' as
> 'master', like:
>
> git clone ssh://git.freedesktop.org/git/libreoffice/bootstrap master

No ... if that's the top-level clone and it creates a repo on the user's
disk called "bootstrap", no it shouldn't. The top-level clone should be

git clone ssh://git.freedesktop.org/git/libreoffice

If you then run a ./download.sh and it pulls a down a load of other
stuff, that can do what it likes inside the top-level libreoffice.

> And for the branches
>
> git clone ssh://git.freedesktop.org/git/libreoffice/bootstrap
> libreoffice-3-3-1
>
> [when available ;-)] etc.  So, I hope the 'bootstrap' part is not that
> important in all this, and anyway, it will get more substance rather
> sooner than later.
>
> Anyway - if too annoying, let's focus on this later; I mostly need
> feedback on the layout itself, the naming is orthogonal to this at this
> stage, I think.
Whatever - it takes volunteers to do it :-) But PLEASE don't keep the
current system where the top-level clone creates a meaninglessly-named
directory in the user's file hierarchy - I don't know about all projects
but none of the other ones I've come across does it.

Cheers,
Wol