Re: LDAP SDK and source repositories

Dan Mosedale wrote:
> On 7/29/09 3:51 PM, Rich Megginson wrote:
>> Robert Kaiser wrote:
>>> Mark Banner wrote:
>>>> a) Move LDAP SDK development to Mercurial. Most of the implications for
>>>> this should be obvious. The directory/ code in cvs could be moved to 
>>>> its
>>>> own repository on hg.mozilla.org. Development would then continue in
>>>> hg.mozilla.org. Tagging and branching would be available if required.
>>>> There is also access control available should it be required.
>>>
>>> Would it make sense to have a "ldap" directory on hg.mozilla.org and
>>> make the different SDKs be different repos, actually?
>>
>> That's essentially the way it is now in CVS:
>> directory/
>> c-sdk/
>> java-sdk/
>> perldap/
> 
> Since perldap and java-sdk both depend on the c-sdk, if the perl/java 
> build infrastructure depends on having the c-sdk in a 
> guaranteed-to-exist known location, it might need to be tweaked a bit if 
> the three are in separate repos.  From the point of view of consuming 
> applications that want to pull from the repo(s) directly, it strikes me 
> that most such apps are going to care at most about one language 
> binding, so the ability to pull & tag that on its own seems like a win 
> there.  As other folks have pointed out, there isn't really that much 
> code, so it's not that big of a deal either way.

Note that perldap does depend on and requires the c-sdk at build time 
and at run time.  perldap does not need to be built "in tree' - you can 
built it with a separate standalone c-sdk installation (and nspr and nss 
too).  The java-sdk is completely independent - it has no dependency on 
the c-sdk at all.
> 
> Dan