[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: A tiny request for the repository move

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:06:53 -0500

Branko Cibej wrote:
> Since we're going to move the repository ... and twiddle it to include
> old CVS history ... and change version numbers ... I thought this would
> be an auspicious time to make another tiny change. It's all about
> setting a good example, and promoting best practices in the (new) community.
>
> The request:
>
> s:trunk:branches/dev:g

What's the new recommendation for all those folks that been sharding their
branches directory by branch types for all these years (into things like
branches/dev, branches/release, branches/feature)? Do they use
branches/release/current? branches/feature/those-too-small-for-branches?
Why not throw tags in there, too, as branches/please-dont-change-these? But
then, if all the branches and tags are in there together, why not just move
them to the root of the project and shard them by their conceptual meanings
-- you know, like /trunk, /tags, and /branches?

I believe there's value in being able to easily identify the conceptual
trunk of a project's development. I believe that the easiest way to do so
is using the TTB structure we've been advocating for a decade. And I
believe that no one with any measure of clue is suffering today as a result
of that recommendation.

-1.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2417249

Received on 2009-11-12 22:07:05 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.