Re: [Axiom-developer] RE: [M#73697383] Re: Disk-quota Request

[Ben Collins-Sussman]

On 10/5/06, Bill Page <address@hidden> wrote:

> When you say "integral part of the axiom src distribution" why
> do you assume that it must be via subversion, cvs, Arch, etc.?

I think that's the central issue here.   A version control system has
exactly one audience:  developers.  It's meant for tracking the
history of source code.  It doesn't need to contain large static
unchanging objects, and it certainly doesn't need to contain other
packages that the code depends on.   It only needs to track the code
itself, the volatile stuff that really needs fine-grained management.

A completely separate concept is that of 'distribution':  some sort of
release package that has everything a user need to 'just run' (or
build) the software.  That's something assembled by a package
maintainer:  it contains sourcecode, docs, dependencies, and maybe
even compiled binaries.  Users are the audience.

Release packages are only created for users when the software reaches
a milestone like "1.2".  It's perfectly reasonable, on the other hand,
to make the (relatively small number) of developers go through some
work to build the latest code:  check out the latest stuff from
version control, grab some tools, grab some dependencies from
somewhere else, etc.  It's some initial one-time overhead for people
who intend to improve the software, rather than just use it.

In a nutshell, what I'm trying to say is:  a version control system is
not a package-distribution system.  One is for a small group of
developers, the other is for a large audience of users.  Mixing the
two concepts can result in a lot of pain.