[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: pkg-java svn layout (was: Re: r1980 - /)

> I made some tests with svn-buildpackage and I really like it. The tool
> uses the layout (svn-inject -o PACKAGE_VERSION.dsc
> svn+ssh://login@svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-java/packages/):
> <...>
> The '-o' argument to svn-inject tells it not to upload upstream tarball
> in subversion repository.

Actually svn-inject also has a '-l' argument:

   "Layout type. 1 (default) means package/{trunk,tags,branches,...}
   scheme, 2 means the {trunk,tags,branches,...}/package scheme.  2 is
   not implemented yet."

Note that even though l2 is not yet implemented, bug #338389 does
contain a patch for it, so if anyone is friends with Eduard Bloch
perhaps they could convince him to include the patch (or some varient of

> If you respect the directory layout, you can use svn-buildpackage to
> build the package. Put upstream tarball outside the svn working
> directory (I did /home/arnaud/debian/upstream) and then:
> $ cd pkgName
> $ ls
> branches  tags  trunk
> $ svn-buildpackage \
>  --svn-override=origDir=/home/arnaud/debian/upstream/ \
>  -uc -us -rfakeroot
> and it just build...

You can actually do that already, i.e. with layout type 2.
svn-buildpackage is already aware of both directory layout types.

> The goal of this mail is to know if you are ok if we change the
> directory layout to:
> pkg-java/packages/PKG_NAME/branches
>                           /tags
>                           /trunk/debian
> If everybody is ok with it, I can do the change and we'll be able to use
> the svn-inject and svn-buildpackge.

Well, there is one big disadvantage to that. Currently those who want to
checkout the trunk of all of the packages can do so with the path
pkg-java/trunk. This is a type of behavior which one would expect from a
few serious debian-java developpers.

With layout type 1, which you are proposing above, it would be
impossible to checkout the trunk of every package without also getting
every branch and tag, which noone should ever want to do.

I think this may have been the reason that we went for the current
directory layout to begin with.

> Maybe there is another way to use svn-buildpackage and svn-inject so we
> could use the directory layout we have at the moment. If you know how,
> I'd be happy to know how.

I think I've covered that already. To summarize, svn-buildpackage should
work fine as is, and svn-inject just needs the '-l' flag implemented for
type 2 layouts.


Was slippery
Curve was sharp
White robe, halo
Wings and harp

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: