launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Robert Collins <robert.collins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 19:02 +0000, Jonathan Lange wrote:


> I personally strongly dislike having projects that aren't linked to
> code (or docs or some sort of shared artifact), and very much like the
> idea of "one codebase corresponds to one project". This is an
> instinctive aesthetic response that I can't back up right now, but am
> happy to hammer it out in the forge of enlightened discourse.

So, if you want codebase;project to be 1:1, I think that is a nice idea
but doesn't work [given LP today].

Violations I see:
 - separate projects to partition corporate sponsored branches of mysql 
   - this is something that mysql *desire*, and is driven by launchpads
     behaviour (but exact details I don't know so won't speculate)
 - single projects representing a companies 'work' but containing N 
   code bases. (And we do this internally at Canonical even :)).

I've done the latter myself, and I think the driving factors for it are:
 - its really really hard to get good bug reports across many arbitrary
   projects
 - bug and branch privacy is not polished for the use case of several
   different groups working privately on one public upstream
 - creating a new project for a temporary internal development effort
   on an upstream goes against the grain: when we aren't /forking/,   
   creating a project-to-be-the-fork feels wrong.

-Rob

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part