Re: more gnome 2 proposal

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com>]

Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com> writes:

> Chema Celorio <chema ximian com> writes: 
> > However a bigger library is indeed easier to build (from my experience)
> > so we need to find a way to fix this. The scenario that itp brought up
> > is a _daily_ royal pain for hackers and to-be-hackers. 
> > 
> 
> My proposal is that we generalize Eazel's cvs-checkout-and-build
> script, and have Tinderbox checking it for function at all times. This
> gives us a canonical location to keep track of which branches,
> etc. are supposed to be used, also. So to build GNOME you'd just grab
> this script out of CVS run it, it would do cvs updates as appropriate
> and so on.
> 
> Suggest writing the script in a real language not /bin/sh so that it's
> maintainable and can do things like read config files.

It's actually done part in shell and part in C; it also depends on
shell aliases. It may well end up much more sane if done all in
Python or the like, though.

> 
> This should be a step in the "work plan" in our proposal, between "set
> up branches" and "set up tinderbox."

I really like that idea, although I think it can go in parallel with
setting up tinderbox, or afterwards.

 - Maciej

_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers