ReplicantDecisions » History » Version 3
Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli, 08/28/2020 04:13 PM
Add more rationale
1 | 1 | Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli | h1. ReplicantDecisions |
---|---|---|---|
2 | |||
3 | {{toc}} |
||
4 | |||
5 | h2. Technical |
||
6 | |||
7 | h3. Moving vendor/lineage to vendor/replicant for Replicant >= 10 |
||
8 | |||
9 | *Background infos:* |
||
10 | * We can't simply symlink vendor/replicant to vendor/lineageOS since some files would be included twice otherwise. |
||
11 | |||
12 | *For*: |
||
13 | * Consistent with previous Replicant versions |
||
14 | * The build scripts are in vendor/replicant and already mentioned in the build tutorials |
||
15 | |||
16 | *Against*: |
||
17 | 2 | Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli | * Lowers the amount of maintenance and the amount of work for keeping the current version up to date and to make new Replicant version in a very significative way: |
18 | 1 | Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli | ** Moving it would require to fork many repository just for changing the path to vendor/replicant |
19 | ** All the repositories will need to be rebased or merged which is time consuming |
||
20 | 3 | Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli | ** Rebasing vendor/replicant itself is usually a pain because of the numerous changes just to change vendor/lineage to vendor/replicant but also because of some variable names changes from LINEAGE/LINEAGEOS to REPLICANT. |
21 | 1 | Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli | |
22 | *Result:* Decided against moving it |
||
23 | |||
24 | *Rationale*: |
||
25 | * Lowering the cost of maintenance was more important than the short term convenience gained by having it in vendor/replicant |
||
26 | * We will try to find other ways to have the scripts in vendor/replicant (and only the scripts) |