On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Gerald Combs <gerald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 8/6/13 4:18 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>
>> Currently all the library archives are stored in SVN and if we simply convert it
>> to Git anyone cloning the repository would have to download all the libs ever
>> checked in (unless using git clone --depth which imposes other limitations).
>> Handling binary files is not exactly where Git shines. There is a
>> separate project,
>> git-annex to support using Git helping file storage, but Windows support is not
>> perfect according to the project's page [1].
>>
>> Regarding the libraries I think it would probably be enough to use a
>> downloadable
>> .zip file containing a snapshot of the needed Windows libraries
>> instead of cloning
>> a Subversion/Git repository to the machine. The scripts maintaining the snapshot
>> could be stored in Git, of course, but I'm not sure if rethinking the
>> library installation
>> should happen before moving the main codebase to Gerrit.
>
> Good point. Ultimately I'd like to get out of the third party package
> business. At Sharkfest Graham mentioned that Nuget
> (http://www.nuget.org/) is starting to gain popularity as a way to
> package development libraries for Windows. I'm hoping we can migrate
> from what we currently have to a set of scripts that generate packages
> and upload them to Nuget.org.
Similarly on Mac, it would be nice if the macosx-setup.sh script could
as much as possible be replaced with a set of homebrew packages (or
some other equivalent).