[sldev] Re: Getting a community/sandbox area in the SL SVN repository?

[Dzonatas]

Here is a suggestion for linden/sandbox:

linden/sandbox/stable
linden/sandbox/testing
linden/sandbox/branches/unstable
linden/sandbox/branches/2007

The first three branches work in the traditional sense. Debian is a good 
example to understand that concept.  The code flows from out of the 
branches/2007, to unstable, then to testing, then to stable. QA is done 
on stable and testing. Only buildme requests can be made on stable only 
after testing has passed a QA phase, which is when testing is copied 
in-full to stable if it passes.

That's the basic suggested principle used by Debian 
http://www.debian.org/releases/, and it is similar to what I used 12-14 
years ago to automate over 600 legal documents. =)

Rob Lanphier wrote:
> Alright, let's go for it.  If you meet the following criteria, and you
> are interested in getting an SVN account on svn.secondlife.com, let me know:
>
> 1.  You have a contribution agreement on file
> 2.  You have at least one patch accepted into the viewer (you show up in
> doc/contributions.txt in the official builds)
> 3.  You are widely recognized as an active and positive contributor by
> the community
>
> #3 is subjective.  Basically, I want to make sure everyone working in
> this branch is comfortable working together, and that we're comfortable
> working with you.  We want there to be some sort of track record.
>
> Note that svn write access is a privilege and not a right.  We reserve
> the right not to give you access, and to yank your access for any reason.
>
> As far as actually distributing any official builds from this
> repository, that's TBD.  Let's get a good routine for getting the code
> in, and then figure out a good routine for getting bits out.
>
> I've created a sandbox directory here:
> http://svn.secondlife.com/svn/linden/sandbox/
>
> ...but nothing has gone in yet.
>
> I haven't yet created any actual branches.  I'd like to make sure we use
> "svn copy" of an already checked in version of the code to serve as a
> base point for any new branches.  It sounds like there's a few ideas for
> long-lived branches.  Here's the guidelines I'd like to follow:
>
> 1.  Only check things into linden/sandbox.  The other areas are reserved
> for code pushed from the official repository
> 2.  Let's get a consensus on the branch structure before we go nuts
> creating new branches
> 3.  Only if a branch is going to be long lived should it be at the root
> of linden/sandbox .  Everything else should go into a year-based
> directory (e.g. linden/sandbox/2007/throwaway)
>
> Rob
>
> On 7/19/07 8:26 PM, Able Whitman wrote:
>   
>> At the Open Source meeting today
>> (https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Open_Source_Meeting/2007-07-19
>> <https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Open_Source_Meeting/2007-07-19>),
>> there was talk of getting a sandbox / community / insert-label-here
>> area on svn.secondlife.com <http://svn.secondlife.com>, along with
>> giving folks with signed source contribution agreements SVN access to
>> the repository.
>>
>> I think this is a great idea--and it seemed like the general consensus
>> was extremely positive--so I'm curious if there's a timeline for
>> putting something like this together.
>>
>> The reason I'm asking is that right now we've got a few people
>> providing their own viewer distributions (me, Nicholaz, and Dale) with
>> varying combinations of patches. And Dzonatas has been putting
>> together a proper repository for the OS.1, .2, and .3 releases, which
>> serve as a good testbed of all the community-submitted JIRA patches
>> all in one big pot. And every different flavor of viewer has different
>> installers, different branding changes, etc.
>>
>> It's great to give people the chance to test JIRA patches before
>> they're integrated into the official viewer, but it's also a pretty
>> fractious situation. Having a single recognized repository for
>> integrating community-contributed patches helps simplify the problem
>> of "what patches are where", it will make branding / icon / trademark
>> changes easier to standardize, it will make it possible to have common
>> installers for each platform, among other things. Plus as we've
>> already seen with the recent Vista issue with OS.3, problems like
>> providing libraries built against the right source with the right
>> compiler (at least for Windows) are easier to solve when there's one
>> place to go for build scripts and such.
>>
>> If getting set up with svn.secondlife.com <http://svn.secondlife.com>
>> is something that can happen in the fairly near future, that would be
>> awesome. If it's going to take some time, then in the meantime I think
>> it makes sense to use the repository Dzonatas has setup as a sort of
>> stop-gap for the time being, if necessary. My concern is just that
>> doing the work to get such a repository working and able to produce
>> builds for each platform will require a good amount of work from a
>> bunch of people. It would be really nice to know if it made sense to
>> do that work now, or wait until svn.secondlife.com
>> <http://svn.secondlife.com> was available and do that work then.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> --Able
>>
>>     
>
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription:
> /index.html
>   

-- 
Power to Change the Void
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20070720/849e932c/attachment-0001.htm