[Dev] Request-4-Opinion: marking deactivated git repos

MyungJoo Ham myungjoo.ham at samsung.com
Thu Dec 29 05:13:53 GMT 2016

>On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 04:51:03 +0000
>MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham at samsung.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 04:29:28 +0000
>> > MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham at samsung.com> wrote:
>> > 
>> > what we do in enlightenment upstream is we literally rename "dead"
>> > repositories. we also mark them clearly in description:
>> > 
>> > https://git.enlightenment.org/
>> > 
>> > look at "Legacy". we do this so code is available if someone wants
>> > to dig through it, but it:
>> > 
>> > 1. is clear by description and/or PATH to git repo that its legacy
>> > (old/dead).
>> > 2. it will force good old build scripts to break - thus informing
>> > whoever runs such tools by way of their build breaking that things
>> > have moved/changed.
>> > 
>> > so i agree that it'd be good to rename and change descriptions when
>> > a repository is abandoned. we should reduce the number of repos
>> > perhaps in the process.  
>> Renaming may incur problems with build processes targetting old Tizen
>> versions.
>> I wish we've never renamed any active git repositories; but we've
>> already committed such sins. Therefore, there are a lot of git repos
>> that are used by some build projects while not supposed to get any
>> attention from code writers.
>> Thus, renaming (or moving) git repos might need some aliasing (e.g.,
>> symbolic links) so that developers might be able to distinguish them
>> quickly while obsolete build systems (for obsolete projects) may keep
>> access them.
>if the code is no longer maintained, worked on, patched, fixed etc...
>shouldn't it break old builds? shouldn't the people doing the build know
>that this is now an orphaned repository and no one is going to look
>after it?

For example, can you identify whether it's deactivated or not by simply
looking at it? (it's dead now.)

If app/core/preloaded/quickpanel is renamed as DEAD/app/corea/preloaded/quickpanel, I'm happy with it.

However, the build systems that tries to get Tizen 3.0 or 2.x will be broken.
That's what I'm concerned with simply renaming/moving dead packages.
(And that's why I though aliasing/symlinks for them might be needed)

And, I do not want to break old (at least for 3.0) builds. (not personal builds, but the builds at build.tizen.org).

More information about the Dev mailing list