Re: [RFC] CVS directory structure

On 15 Nov 2003 at 11:35, Tobias Schlitt wrote: > So, after all those discussions during my test, I'd now like to have a > real proposal for that, because it seems quite usefull to me. Please > leave all your flames at home for another post (or hopefully for > another list). Thanks a lot! > > HTML Version: http://schlitt.info/RFCs/cvs_dir_structure.htm > > -------- > Proposal > -------- > [...] > > 1. > Change the PEAR CVS directory structure to reflect the PEAR user > directory structure completly. Simply use ini_set('include_path', > '/your/cvs/pear'); or any other mechanism to require PEAR directories. > [...] > > 2. > Change the PEAR CVS directory structur to reflect parts of the PEAR > user directory structure. Insert a directory level into every package > directory which is named after the category and store all package > needed files below this. [...] The first solution you propose is bad in my eyes because it totally mixes the current CVS-structure, can't be handled on a "per package"- basis and it's not possible to clearly make sure that you only work on the specific files of the package you're working on. So in my eyes the second solution is good and handy. In my eyes there are no bad side-effects about this - apart from the one-time work that we need to change the CVS-structure. But as you pointed out, Tobi, this is done once only and makes development much easier. I'm +1 for this idea - although I would like to stress that such a dramatic change is nothing that we can decide by just 5x +1 :-) All votes / voices on the list should function as a basis for a decision of the core-group which will then set the standards accordingly. Please folks, involve in this discussion and make constructive (!) suggestions. We should end this thread soon, in my eyes. Regards, Stefan