Karl Fogel wrote:
> "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato@collab.net> writes:
>> As a community, we could probably stand to carefully consider this idea of
>> the Subversion core system. I mean, honestly, why are svnversion and
>> svnsync in the main source tree while mailer.py and svnmerge.py (which also
>> uses custom properties) relegated to the tools/ directory. Simply because
>> they aren't written in C? These might be healthy questions to entertain.
>
> I think you might have an unorthodox interpretation of our source tree
> layout.
>
> Stuff in tools/ *is* in the main source tree, and is a supported part
> of Subversion. Stuff in contrib/ is not, we just distribute it with
> Subversion for users' convenience. (This distinction is exactly why
> we have the two directories.)
>
> The subversion/ subdirectory in our tree is just where we put all the
> C libraries. We could even move the client apps out of there if we
> wanted to. In fact, I wouldn't mind having lib/ and apps/ and getting
> rid of subversion/. But that's a separate discussion.
>
> In any case, tools/ is part of Subversion.
I have to disagree. There's a fair bit of stuff in tools/ that does not
meet the level of quality that we realistically expect of the main
distribution. I'd characterize tools/ as a dumping ground for quick
hacks that have not been polished into final products. To me, the
difference between tools/ and contrib/ is that tools/ is supposed to be
under the Subversion License, and we actually try to keep stuff in there
working.
Max.
Received on Tue Aug 22 12:40:28 2006