[Koha-devel] externalising translator and etc

[LAURENT Henri-Damien]

Le 10/11/2010 19:10, Galen Charlton a écrit :
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 11:11 AM, LAURENT Henri-Damien
> <henridamien.laurent at biblibre.com> wrote:
>> Hi
>> I propose to get etc and translator as external git repositories.
>> Why ?
>>
>> It would allow to have po files in their own repository and limit the
>> weight of Koha git archives.
>> For etc, it would allow to change the installer in order to keep track
>> of local changes for every person and therefore be able to synchronize
>> with community version properly.
> 
> -1 for moving etc to a separate Git project.  The default
> configuration files are an integral part of Koha.  For variant
> configurations such as a Plack or nginx config, it would be clearer to
> have relevant files in subdirectories or identified by file name
> instead of putting them in branches.  That way, somebody installing
> Koha for the first time would see (say) both an etc/koha-apache.conf
> and an etc/koha-nginx.conf; i.e., all of the options would be directly
> in front of them.  Furthermore, often changes made to files in etc are
> dependent on changes made to code or templates; separating etc and the
> rest of Koha into submodules would make it harder to prepare patches
> and manage topic branches.
My idea for that is that tracking addition of zebra indexes and all that
stuff would be considerably eased if there was an initial etc repository
that installer clone into /home/koha/kohadev
Then makes the updates on strings and commit.
All the index to fit customized library need could be tracked.
We create a git repository for all the installations, but when you
create the repository from the processed files, it looses
synchronization with all the common indexes which could be required for
Koha when one adds some other minor feature or fixes a bug in the indexer.
An other reason is that etc doesnot vary much. But when it varies, when
you upgrade users should be aware that they might loose their custom
indexes. I wanted to make next upgrades smoother for libraries.
I am with you when you propose to use different directories. This would
bring to :
etc
 |- koha-conf.xml or koha-conf.yml i.e. ONLY Koha common configuration
(database access and so on. No more zebra stuff in that. )
 |- authentication
 ||- LDAP
 ||- CAS
 |-webserver
 ||- apache2
 ||- nginx
 |- searchengine
 ||-zebradb
 ||-solr
 ||-pazpar2

Are you with me ?
But then, when one chooses one type of webserver, one type of
authentication, one type of searchengine, he would use only a few of all
the installation files (which could become quite a forest).
I wanted the structure for etc simpler so that sysadmins would not be
overwhelmed by big picture.


> 0 for moving the PO files to a separate Git project.  The size of the
> repository doesn't really strike me as a big deal; the Git protocol is
> pretty efficient.  That said, while I don't see a great deal of
> benefit to splitting the translations off into a separate repository,
> I don't see much harm either.
Well it is quite striking when you get 249Mo to dl when doing a git
clone. :) (mainly because any change you commit on po files is storing a
new instance of this file)
ADSL is coping well with that... But there are still some places in the
world which donot have access to wide bandwidth.

Regards.
-- 
Henri-Damien LAURENT