[csw-maintainers] A question of naming, in our svn repository

[Dagobert Michelsen]

Hi Phil,

Am 29.06.2010 um 18:58 schrieb Philip Brown:
> Maintainers, your input is required, over a matter of policy in naming
> directories, in our subversion repository.
>
> We have two mutually exclusive ways to go:
> a) facilitate finding an svn directory from an "upstream" name
> b) facilitate finding an svn directory from a package name.
>
> Specific example, of the general case:
> We have a package, "gtk_engines".
> Should the subversion directory for it, be named "gtk-engines", or
> "gtk_engines"?
>
> My thoughts on the issue are as follows:
>
> Of the people coming to our subversion repository, (both maintainers,
> and non-maintainers)
> almost no-one will care about case (a).

On the contrary. See below.

> They will mostly care about either "I want to take an existing OpenCSW
> package, but recompile it with my own tweaks", or "I am going to take
> over a package; I need to grab it from svn".
> its all very well to say, "yes well the specific directory  
> information is in the
> OPENCSW_REPOSITORY property", but that is a hassle to look for, and
> most people will forget about that anyway (if they even knew it in the
> first place)

It is. And it is as simple as
   root at login [login]:/root > pkgparam CSWbash OPENCSW_REPOSITORY
   https://gar.svn.sf.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/pkg/bash/trunk@9406
Additionally, the link should be given on the package information  
webpage as
browsable link, so it is fairly obvious where to look without any  
guessing at all.

Additionally, there may be more than one package produced by a GAR  
recipe.
Think of pm_subversion. Would you look in cpan/? Or where? It is in
subversion/ which I personally find ok as there is no natural way to  
find
the location of the GAR recipe besides from looking in the package.

My most common usecase is to look for a recipe when the package has  
*not*
been released and the only information I have is the upstream name as it
has not been released as I said.

> In my view, simpler is better. not to mention being internally
> consistent.

Consistency here is an illusion as there is no consistent name of a  
package from
a recipe.

> I think the svn directory name should match the
> package/catalog name. In the instance where multiple packages come out
> of a single svn directory, I think the directory should be named after
> the "main" package.
> (which we mostly already do anyway. eg: "curl" ->
> "curl_devel","curl_rt", "curl".)

Maybe you should outline what you would adjust. Changing
   gtk-stuff
to
   gtk_stuff
is no problem at all as the name is basically the same and both
can be found by grepping for the components.


Best regards

   -- Dago