RFC: icedtea-cacao branch vs. clone
twisti at complang.tuwien.ac.at
Fri Sep 7 09:18:53 PDT 2007
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 13:34 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> We are still learning how to most effectively use mercurial as a group.
> Personally I would have expected more people to just make clones of
> icedtea and publish their own repos. But clearly people seem to like the
> one shared repo approach even though technically that isn't really
> Since we are using a shared published repo at the time I think it makes
> sense to go for a named branch in that one IF the intent is to merge
> that branch eventually with the default one. Is the idea that
> icedtea-cacao eventually just becomes a configure option for icedtea
Yes, I think that should be the way to go, doing at some point a merge
(maybe when things are working) to the default branch and use a
configure option for IcedTea.
What I want to do:
* add the required patches
* add a configure option (e.g. --with-cacao)
* a make should pull the CACAO sources from HG/tarball (not sure yet)
and build CACAO
Are people OK with that?
More information about the distro-pkg-dev