Re: LDAP SDK and source repositories

On 27/07/2009 17:25, Rich Megginson wrote:
> Moving to Mercurial is fine with me. I've been using git now for quite
> some time and have really grown to like how much better it is than CVS.
> I understand hg is similar to git. As far as the repo layout, it doesn't
> matter to me if the c-sdk has its own top level repo or is part of a
> larger repo, as long as it is easy to
> 1) checkout just the c-sdk

hg clone http://hg.mozilla.org/whatever/it/is

> 2) build just the c-sdk

As normal ;-)

> 3) tag individual and separate c-sdk releases

hg tag -r <changeset> MY_TAG

I'm not quite sure what you mean by separate c-sdk releases.

> 4) produce individual source code releases of the c-sdk

You can:

hg clone ....

hg update -r MY_TAG

Then you could zip it up, which would include the history, or I expect 
we could probably copy one of the source tar ball commands from the 
mozilla-central/comm-central build systems that would get you just the 
source files.


Rich, so are you saying you would be happy to split the different SDKs 
across repositories? Or would you prefer them all in one?

The only thing I can think of with having them all-in-one is that one 
tag would tag all the files in the repository, but I guess that isn't 
really an issue.

 From a comm-central view point I think we could cope with either, 
although if we did an all-in-one I'd probably think about moving the 
xpcom sdk back to the LDAP repository as that would also help building 
binary extensions against xulrunner with LDAP.

Mark.