Peter Soetens wrote:
> Hi Sylvain,
>
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:23, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...> wrote:
>
>> I've been using github for development since two years now. It's great,
>> as long as you are doing "your stuff" it sucks if you want to develop as
>> a project.
>>
>
> I agree that github has this focus.
>
>
>> I've been looking around, and gitorious seems much nicer in that
>> respect: it allows you to gather repositories under a project name, have
>> project team members and so on, while keeping the ability to fork
>> separate repositories on a person-by-person basis. Plus it has a very
>> nice, patch-based, review system.
>>
>
> Nice :-)
>
>
>> Well ... at least that is how it looks like. In other words: I did not
>> try it.
>>
>> Let's come to the point of this mail: I'd like to give gitorious a test
>> drive *before* the developer's workshop. I do *not* want to push on what
>> layout/build system/repository structure we should use (that is on my
>> preferred "discussion point" for the workshop), but to be able to try
>> gitorious with actual code. I'm asking on the ML mainly because I would
>> like to use the "orocos" name for convenience reasons.
>>
>
> I don't see a problem here, as long as you want to share the
> administration rights.
>
Yes, of course. That's one nice thing about gitorious: administration
rights can be given to whole teams, which makes project-like management
much easier.
>
>> In summary: I'm asking the list if everyone is fine with me using the
>> "orocos" name on gitorious to create various projects/repositories (see
>> description below), projects/layout that would later be converted to
>> whatever is decided at the workshop. Or if the consensus would is that I
>> should use another name.
>>
>
> When the I becomes a 'We', it's ok.
>
Sorry for the wording. It was definitely a "we" in my mind. Obviously,
I'm not asking the list if I can have a holding on the orocos name ;-)
>
>> What I would like to do
>> --------------------------------------
>> What I want to do is create various orocos-related projects on gitorious
>> and move the RubyInMotion code to them. I'll do that for RTT 2.0, i.e. I
>> will only put on there RTT 2.0-related stuff.
>>
>
> Good !
>
>
>> Among the "projects" that would be there:
>>
>> * orocos-base: base types (time class, laser ranges, ...). In the
>> future, that would be transformed into whatever solution is decided
>> (i.e. maybe ROS IDL types).
>> * orocos-toolchain: RTT itself plus the Ruby toolchain, the Orocos
>> typekit for the base types and the logger component
>> * orocos-drivers: drivers that we have developed at DFKI and are
>> already available on RubyInMotion.
>>
>> plus, for each project, an orocos-XXX-autoproj.git repository that
>> contains the relevant autoproj configuration.
>>
>
> I don't object here, I'm sure this will change (slightly) along the
> way anyway, so give it a shot.
>
> Sorry for late replying, I was abroad and on holidays...
>
> Peter
>