Re: LDAP SDK and source repositories

Mark Banner wrote:
> 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

Ok, good.

> 
>> 2) build just the c-sdk
> 
> As normal ;-)

heh

> 
>> 3) tag individual and separate c-sdk releases
> 
> hg tag -r <changeset> MY_TAG

Would this tag the entire repo, or just the c-sdk portion?  Or does it 
really matter?  I know with git, tags are cheap and easy to manage, so 
it doesn't really matter.

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

If it doesn't matter that non-c-sdk code will be tagged with a c-sdk 
release tag, then it doesn't matter if the c-sdk repo is completely 
separate.

> 
>> 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.

With git, I can use the git archive command to produce a source tarball 
from a specific tag or changeset (commit).  But I think that archives 
the entire repository, not a subdirectory.  If that's not possible, then 
we can just use clone and update to get the local source repo in the 
right state, then just use tar directly against the source repo.

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

For the perl and java sdks, they can be separate, since (afaik) no other 
mozilla component uses them.  For the c-sdk, as long as we can preserve 
the ability to develop and make c-sdk releases independent of 
t-bird/seamonkey, if it makes life easier for t-bird/seamonkey 
developers to have the code embedded in their larger source code 
repositories, I think that would be fine.

> 
> 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.

As long as tags are cheap and easy to manage, which I'm assuming they 
are with hg.

> 
>  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.