<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Frank Loeffler wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20101202144549.GG14637@numrel07.cct.lsu.edu"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 08:25:12AM -0500, Erik Schnetter wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I think GetComponents
should be handled in the same way, and would omit the symlink.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I wouldn't know how to do that without just coping GetComponents and not
having it in a repository.
</pre>
</blockquote>
As Frank said, this would not be possible with the way GetComponents
handles git repositories. We would have to symlink GetComponents (or
a "CRL" directory). I'm not particularly happy with the way this is
handled by GetComponents, and I've been thinking about modifying the
behavior to place the actual repo in !TARGET unless something is
specified in !CHECKOUT, but that is another discussion...<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20101202144549.GG14637@numrel07.cct.lsu.edu"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">What
may be a good idea is to introduce a "bin" directory in the Cactus
source tree and put copies/links of all the tools there.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I agree with that. It would be kind of strange to have both bin/ and exe/
(I don't like the name exe/ so much anyway), but I think we could live
with that.
</pre>
</blockquote>
I like the "bin" directory idea too.
<blockquote cite="mid:20101202144549.GG14637@numrel07.cct.lsu.edu"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Who has write permission to the github repository? It is always good
if one or two external people (i.e. Einstein Toolkit maintainers that
are not the main tool developers) have write permission as well in
cases of emergency.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I think I should have, but never tried. Eric should probably also give
you, and a couple of other maintainers access - but I guess he needs to
know your github id for that.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Both Frank and Erik should have write access to GetComponents on
GitHub.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20101202144549.GG14637@numrel07.cct.lsu.edu"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">2. Deleting the svn version of GetComponents in utils/Scripts.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I would not delete it. At the very least I would replace it with a
script which prints a message pointing to the new location.
</pre>
</blockquote>
This is a good idea.<br>
<br>
<br>
As to Erik's suggestion of placing everything in a single "CRL"
directory, that would actually be a more sensible name for the git
repository. It also holds my experimental generateCRL script, which
generates a component list based on the items you have checked out
(only works with cvs and svn so far). I don't know if GitHub allows
you to change the name of your repository, but I might change it if
they do.<br>
<br>
Eric<br>
</body>
</html>