Contributors mailing list archives


Re: Migration to version 9

Acsone SA/NV, Stéphane Bidoul
- 31/08/2015 10:08:03
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Guewen Baconnier <> wrote:
my voice goes certainly to the "installable: False" solution. 
Me too, obviously. 
KISS and supports well the different git workflows (forward ports
merges...). Also, a script as proposed by Stéphane alleviates the
issue raised by someone which is that they don't know which module is
migrated or not.
I also argues that giving adequate visibility to unported modules is important.

Regarding the one module / one repo, here is my take on this. 

I believe the perimeter of each repository must match what each PSC is ready/willing/has the resources to maintain.

We must not confuse the repository structure with packaging, release and dependency management. For the latter we have decent tools in python and we must strive to use them (ie and all the tooling building on top of that).

It should be perfectly possible to have one PSC managing one repository containing many modules and making independent releases of each modules with proper versioning and dependencies.

So I suggest
* keeping the current repo structure for know
* reinforce the role of PSC's (which is a goal of the current board)
* let the repository structure slowly evolve according to PSC's and functional perimeters
* work (again?) on proper packaging and release management at the module level

Best regards,