[etoys-dev] Re: Merging Etoys

Karl Ramberg karlramberg at gmail.com
Sat Feb 20 12:36:51 EST 2010

Bert Freudenberg skrev 2010-02-20 17:31:
> On 20.02.2010, at 16:46, K. K. Subramaniam wrote:
>> On Saturday 20 February 2010 04:56:30 pm Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>>> What I meant to add is that this Etoys repo would hold all code currently
>>> in the Etoys image, just as the trunk repo holds all code in the trunk
>>> image. Ideally we'd add a configuration-based update mechanism just as in
>>> trunk so that we can easily load updates by pushing a button. Does that
>>> make the idea more clear?
>> The source code in Etoys packages are less than 8% of overall source code (35k
>> out of 527k). Why not keep only the Etoys packages in the repo and compose an
>> image on demand from the current trunk? Patches for trunk could go into Inbox
>> while those for Etoys could go into tracker.
>> Is it possible to automatically harvest changesets in updates.list into mcz?
>> Then we don't have to decide between cs or mcz right away. I don't know the
>> history behind cs vs. mcz and don't intend to reawaken a flame war ;-).
>> Subbu
> Sigh. Etoys is *not* just what is called the Etoys package in the trunk. At least not *yet*. As I wrote earlier:
> "Then we have two sets of packages - the ones in trunk and the ones in the Etoys image, so we can easily compare them. Then we can gradually modify the Etoys-image packages so they become more like those in the trunk. At the same time, fixes done in Etoys would be applied to the trunk. In the end, the packages will be the same, and we're done."
> So that's why we need a repository for *all* the packages in Etoys - to work on making them more similar to the trunk.
> - Bert -
Nitpick: I see that the package is called EToys in trunk, while the 
official name is Etoys


More information about the etoys-dev mailing list