Re: [SVN-MIGRATION] Reorganization and splitting

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 01:48, Gwynne Raskind
<[email protected]> wrote:
> In order to progress further on the SVN conversion, I need to know how many
> projects need separate repositories from php-src, and the purpose and active
> status of *all* the current CVS modules. The complete list of current CVS
> modules is appended to the end of this e-mail. Anyone with status
> information on them, please step forward and let me know. And anyone who
> knows which projects need to be their own SVN repository, instead of merged
> with that of php-src, also please let me know.

[snip long list of modules]

[I will be sending 3 replies to this thread, sorry to all
svn-migration@ subscribers, but I feel this is necessary to keep
relevant parties involved]
[this mail *hopefully* will get to all doc-<lang>@lists.php.net as
this is sent to the new "[email protected]" alias which is supposed to
represent all translation mailinglists if our mailservers are
correctly configured, if not I will hunt systems@ down and chop one
toe off per day until it gets fixed]

I discussed this (and learned *a lot* about SVN in the process) with
Gwynne on IRC couple of hours ago... Here is our "vote"


phpdoc[*] would like its own repository.
The structure (modules) of the repo should be:
doc-base will be "the new phpdoc/"
 - contains the docbook/, phpbook/, entities/ and all the "core" stuff
en/ [NEW MODULE]
 - the current phpdoc/en directory
[insert-two-letter-country-code-here]
 - contains translations of the en/ dir (currently in CVS as phpdoc-<foobar>)
 - NOTE: This is a rename from phpdoc-<lang>-dir!!


That means:
 phpdoc editors have full karma over the phpdoc/ repository (including
translations) and can grant karma as they see fit.
Furthermore we have full control over all "svn hooks" (pre-commit,
post-commit, whatever) as we desire, be it build verification, cvs
commit mails, bug closing or whatever.
 Translators are not required to "svn checkout" anything but the
"doc-base" (altough it is _higly_ recommended to checkout the en tree
to translate from)
 english doc writers only need to checkout the "doc-base" and "en" tree

In practice: This means we have full control over what we want to do,
whenever we want to do it, totally independent from each other with
*no* added complexity ("complexity" being a relative term, translators
would have to checkout "doc-base", "en", "<lang>", en guys: "doc-base"
and "en").

I am probably fucking up explanations here, Gwynne: feel totally free
to bash me and fix any mess I may have created.

-Hannes