[Gnu-arch-users] more recent changes in address@hidden/tla--mainline--1.1

[Colin Walters]

Hi,

In addition to the changes I posted previously, here are two more
changesets:

address@hidden
  tla
    tla--mainline
      tla--mainline--1.1

[...]

        patch-41
          get-patch: allow specifying just a patch level
 
        patch-42
          inventory defaults rework

The first one I think should not be controversial.  

The second might be, however.  First, here's the archive log:

---
Revision: tla--mainline--1.1--patch-42
Archive: address@hidden
Creator: Colin Walters <address@hidden>
Date: Sat Oct 18 15:10:56 EDT 2003
Standard-date: 2003-10-18 19:10:56 GMT
Modified-files: libarch/arbdelta.c libarch/build-revision.c
    libarch/cmd-changes.c libarch/cmd-changeset.c
    libarch/cmd-deltapatch.c libarch/cmd-do-changeset.c
    libarch/cmd-id-tagging-defaults.c
    libarch/cmd-redo-changes.c libarch/cmd-revdelta.c
    libarch/cmd-srcfind.c libarch/commit.c libarch/inv-ids.c
    libarch/inv-ids.h libarch/invent.c libarch/invent.h
    libarch/make-changeset.c libarch/proj-tree-lint.c
    libarch/project-tree.c libarch/star-merge.c
    libarch/undo.c
New-patches: address@hidden/tla--mainline--1.1--patch-42
Summary: inventory defaults rework
Keywords:
 
In general, default to being less strict about inventory classification.
Untagged source is now treated as backup by default.  tree-lint is
less strict about untagged source (so you can import/commit).
 
Move the default unrecognized regexp contents (like .o files) into
junk.  And finally, add some commented-out junk regexps for autotools to
the default file, so people can easily uncomment them.
 
This change passes 'make test', but we likely need more tests...
 
--- (end archive log)

When I first started using arch I felt that the inventory was rather
suffocating.  I have come to appreciate more a bit the reasoning behind
it, but I still don't think the defaults are at all suitable for most
people.  Getting their regexps right is still the biggest stumbling
block for people to switch to using tla, even with the untagged-source
directive.

The thing is, most people just don't _care_ about build systems and
"tree cleanliness".  They just want their program to compile and stuff.
This attitude is unfortunate, but it's simply the case for the vast
majority of free software projects out there, and it has permeated their
build system, making it extraordinarily difficult to fix.
 
tla right now is very powerful, but it's kind of a big bite to swallow. 
I'd like to make it a smaller bite at first, but once they've
bitten...then we can reel them in and speak to them of the virtues of
strict tagging-methods, and convince them that things like separate
build directories are a good idea.

Thoughts?

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