[racket-dev] proposal for moving to packages: repository

From: Eli Barzilay (eli at barzilay.org)
Date: Tue May 21 14:30:16 EDT 2013

[keeping the different subject since this is still about the repo.]

Yesterday, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> One nice thing about the current repo organization is that push
> notifications for every part of the PLT codebase go to all of the
> developers.
> Will that still be available in this organization scheme? (I don't
> care if it's opt-in too much, but opt-out will hopefully mean more
> eyes see the code)

This is easy both in our git server (it's easy to have a shared
configuration so all of them get the same notifications, and
bug-fix-messages are caught in all of them), and in github (where
you'll need to "watch" all of them).

Yesterday, Carl Eastlund wrote:
> I'd like to mention, though, that git submodules can be a real pain
> for synchronizing development of multiple repositories.  They seem
> to have been designed primarily for importing upstream repositories,
> rather than for multiple "peer" repositories.

Two points about submodules:

1. My impression is that they have improved a *lot* in the past ~2
   years or so.  Not only in terms of better functionality, but also
   in terms of convenience of using them.

2. If things go the way I suggested in the other email, then there's
   no real need to use submodules.  You need to have these
   repositories somewhere if you want to work on them (or a subset if
   you work on only some of them) -- and you should be able to get
   them any way you want.  There's no reason for the core repository
   to come with submodule points for all of the packages.  I think
   that it might makes sense to keep some meta repository for people
   who want a convenient checkout of all packages -- but if you don't
   like submodules, you just don't use it.

          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!

Posted on the dev mailing list.