[Mono-docs-list] Monodoc split, redux

Jonathan Pryor jonpryor@vt.edu
Sun, 13 Feb 2005 17:47:26 -0500

On Sat, 2005-02-12 at 17:37 -0500, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> Hey,
> > Might I suggest mono-tools?  It already exists, Type Reflector is
> > already in it (as is the debugger, but that can change if necessary),
> > and it has a prototype .spec file for RPM builds.
> Mhm, I checked this out today and it is an empty module that was pulling
> third party dependencies.  Pulling dependencies does not work with SVN.
> Maybe we should move the actual tools here?

I have some good news and some bad news.

The good news is that SVN does support the equivalent of CVS Ampersand
directory modules, which mono-tools was using.  The SVN equivalent is
the "svn:externals" property on a module directory.

See: http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/ch07s03.html

The bad news is that this isn't *exactly* the same.  In particular, the
svn:externals property contains a name/value pair of directories to
checkout into, and the fully-qualified URL of a versioned resource.  The
problem is it *must* be fully-qualified, which may be a problem since we
have two public SVN URLs: the URL for developers at mono-cvs.ximian.com,
and the URL for everyone else at mono.myrealbox.com.

For now I've added a svn:externals definition for type-reflector
pointing to mono.myrealbox.com.  Pro: this allows everyone to checkout
mono-tools and at least see type-reflector (I didn't re-add debugger);
Con: developers won't be able to actually edit any files within type-
reflector -- they'll have have manually checkout type-reflector
separately to make any changes to it.

Whether svn:externals is the way to move forward is certainly debatable.
It may be better to just move the existing projects into mono-tools, and
not give them separate directories as well.

 - Jon