> Since you won't develop any new features on those branches, I propose a
> somewhat different naming scheme; either:
>
> /branches/ebcdic-trunk
> /branches/ebcdic-1.1.x
>
> or
>
> /ebcdic/trunk
> /ebcdic/1.1.x
>
> i.e., put the ebcdic port on the top level alongside /trunk, /tags and
> /branches. If anyone thinks this is too radical, remember that the
> repository structure is here to serve us, not the other way around.
Either of those structures would be fine with me.
My main issue is that even the best-case scenario it will probably be quite
a while before all of this code lands on the main trunk and I want to be
able to produce releases (mirroring your releases) for OS/400 users in the
interim. So I need a structure that has branches for those releases. Both
your suggestions would do that fine, as with mine. I guess my thought was
that confining all of the activity under a single location, whether it be
at the repository root, or under a branches folder, would be easier from an
administrative standpoint. That way I can be authorized to a location, and
if I need to make a branch, I can just do so.
Thanks
Mark
_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Feb 12 14:28:42 2005