[crossfire] CVS -> SVN conversion

[Nicolas Weeger (Laposte)]

> flex files that generate .c (loader.c) - not a big space user, yet at the
> same time, pretty trivial for most people to generate (probably any system
> that has gcc can pretty easily install flex if not already there).  The
> flex files do not change very often.  The one question might be windows
> (can they easily be regenerated there?).  Given these are small files, I'm
> sort of mixed on these. The version of flex used to generate these files
> really doesn't have any impact on performance - I don't think we've ever
> had an issue where someone had a bad version of flex installed that caused
> problems.

Windows users can generate loader.c with flex, already done that. Just need to 
ensure the right flags are used (iirc case-insensitivity, for instance).

> rebuilt lib files (Archetypes, images, etc):  These are the files I'm most
> inclined to leave out of SVN.  The images tend to be quite big (slowing
> down updates).  Plus, the updates are rather inconsistent - they are not
> updated after every change is made to an arch, but rather when someone
> remembers to or is some critical need.  Within SVN, we can set up lib/arch
> to point to the actual arch tree, so an update of the server also gets
> updated arches.  Plus, we already have all the tools in place to collect
> them (the collect.pl script), so this doesn't add any additional software
> dependencies.  If anything, this may actually help people use the updated
> archs.

The only issue with that is that archs would now be part of the 
whole "crossfire" module. Thus changing an arch will make a new server 
version.
Unless i'm wrong?

BTW, while we're at messing with stuff, shouldn't "crossfire" be renamed 
to "server"?

>   As a note, for any files that we automatically generate that are not
> normally in SVN (if we so decide) yet are in the distributions we ship out,
> I'd expect they would be in the release branch of the SVN repository for
> that release (so you can go to the 1.10 branch and see what the archetypes
> file had, or see what the makefile looked like, etc).  Although, maybe even
> that is useless - could always just download the old releases.

As a remark, I'd say to automate stuff as much as possible in that case. That 
is make a nice script building everything, collecting archetypes, generating 
tarballs, all this stuff. Even if it only takes 15m to do by hand, that 
becomes a pain fast :)
(talking from Windows experience, where i should definitely automate things!)

Nicolas