Closed marmotz closed 9 years ago
I don't see immediate benefits to merge these two repositories.
On cloning the atoum repository, a developper get the source AND the documentation in a given version.
I prefere to let the two splitted. Why?
@marmotz we can also add submodule to atoum core repository to get the documentation inside if we want.
@Grummfy +1.
Is it possible to specify a submodule tag ?
Because the goal is to have an atoum version and the appropriate documentation, not all the documentation.
In an other way, the current documentation is not "readable" because contains some macro reST. Maybe the code should contain only a html/txt build of the documentation for a given version, generated when we release a new version of atoum ?
A submodule is a reference to a specific commit (like a tag).
When you clone the repository you need to do git submodule init
and in case of update git submodule update
, it's a bit **\ but it's working well and prmit a lot.
an automatic build is maybe a better solution...
I think that keeping two distinct repository will be better. As said before it has many pros. We have to ensure that keeping two distinct repositories will still allow us to publish documentation for each branch/release of atoum and keep it in sync.
The submodule could be good : one can clone the main atoum repository and immediately get the doc. This is valid for those working on master. Now that we have releases on atoum we can also attache a PDF version of the doc to each release.
Ok, so, who is agree with:
@marmotz :+1:
@marmotz :+1:
Hi,
For now, atoum sources and documentation are in 2 separates repositories.
This issue is to debate then decide if we stay in this configuration or if we merge this 2 repositories.