Rockbox mail archive

• Next message: sophana: "Re: Bluechip forking"
• Previous message: Björn Stenberg: "Re: Bluechip forking"
• In reply to: sophana: "Re: Bluechip forking"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, sophana wrote:

> I know that maintaining a lot of build option in the same cvs branch is hard
> to maintain (and validate)

I disagree. I'm involved in many projects where we keep track of lots of
config options in the same development branch. It is only a matter of
organizing.

> But I think there is definitly something to do to implement lots of things
> inside rockbox, while maintaining coherency.

I think we should implement everything sensible in Rockbox, and allow basicly
everything (including unsensible things) as plugins.

> A tool like subversion instead of cvs does help a LOT in managing branches.
> I use it at work, and the branch management (and merging) is working great.

I don't think we have a problem with the versioning tool at this point. I
agree that Subversion is a cool tool, and you might know that I've been
involved in that project since several years back.

We are determined to switch to Subversion one day.

> the linux kernel has TONs of options (with xconfig...) rockbox has a (very
> small) configure script. It should exploited better, don't you think?

Possibly. Any particular specific suggestions?

> I know that the most configurable, and the most complex it will be. maybe
> each option maintainer will be responsible to maintain their option up to
> date?

I don't think it is that simple. Code changes in one end affects things in the
other. Rockbox is a tiny thing that we can't have bloat up just because we
want to keep thing logically split up.

> The number of waiting patches is clearly high...

Yes, but there are many reasons for that. The most common one is that the code
in the patch isn't conforming to our requirements, but also that we don't
agree that the patch offers something that should go in, and in many cases
just that no person with commit access have yet got/taken the time to apply
it, test it and commit it.

We invite all users to test all patches and comment them/update them/improve
them. It helps the one(s) who get to do the commit.

-- 
 Daniel Stenberg -- http://rockbox.haxx.se/ -- http://daniel.haxx.se/
_______________________________________________
http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox

• Next message: sophana: "Re: Bluechip forking"
• Previous message: Björn Stenberg: "Re: Bluechip forking"
• In reply to: sophana: "Re: Bluechip forking"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]