I'd rather have it directly in the source than as a bundle, but I guess it's up to you really.
We do not want to keep anyone from working on it, of course. Just the idea of releasing this also "standalone" as a block allocator package seemed interesting, and still is. The current GJAlloc even includes some C++ code so that GJAlloc can be used instead of std::allocator and so on, where applicable. All of this (or at least the parts concerning Pike) certainly could be managed in the Pike tree and then from time to time made into a .tar.gz release of the allocator. However, what if we moved the allocator development git repository right next to the Pike repository, same ACLs as pike.git? We would also give out access to the github repository readily, of course, but that does not seem like a particularly smart process.
In any case, suggestions on how to achieve a good process for both Pike and standalone releases are more than welcome.
In any case, suggestions on how to achieve a good process for both Pike and standalone releases are more than welcome.
Maybe a reasonable compromise is to include it in Pike as a git submodule then? One would still need to clone the separate GJAlloc repo to be able to hack on it, but it'd avoid the bundle step at least. I don't have any direct experience with git submodules though, so I don't know how easy they are to work with.
Sharing the ACLs with Pike would be nice if you're ok with it. Wouldn't the simplest way to achieve that be to use pike-git.lysator.liu.se for GJAlloc as well?
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012, Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum wrote:
In any case, suggestions on how to achieve a good process for both Pike and standalone releases are more than welcome.
Maybe a reasonable compromise is to include it in Pike as a git submodule then? One would still need to clone the separate GJAlloc repo to be able to hack on it, but it'd avoid the bundle step at least. I don't have any direct experience with git submodules though, so I don't know how easy they are to work with.
Sharing the ACLs with Pike would be nice if you're ok with it. Wouldn't the simplest way to achieve that be to use pike-git.lysator.liu.se for GJAlloc as well?
yes, sharing acls and putting it there sounds good.
I also like the idea of having it as a submodule, but I have also never used them. I remember grubba saying on the chat that its better to avoid them...
pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se