On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 12:30:33AM +0200, Marcin Kasperski wrote:
> I read the book. And I am even commenting on it.
>
> The convention:
> /
> calc/
> trunk/
> tags/
> branches/
> calendar/
> trunk/
> tags/
> branches/
> spreadsheet/
> trunk/
> tags/
> branches/
> works only when the projects are totally independent (in fact, it
> is close to using separate repositories) and even then it is
> hard to use for someone who works on many projects. The main
> problem with this structure is that one can not easily checkout
> or update the trunk of the whole repository without accidental
> checkout of all the tags and branches.
>
> Same for the next one.
>
> To protect a developer from accidental checkout of all the tags
> and branches, subversion repo must be organized so tags
> constitute separate tree. And then we get to the problem of
> inefficient huge tags&branches bag which can not be easily
> navigated to from the working copy.
This is FUD. I use this directory structure on my own repo. Worst case
scenario I don't realize my mistaken and I wait. Standard scenario, I
hit cancel. In pratice, I haven't really had this problem. I did it
once when I first set up the repo. Haven't since then.
You can't possibly be seriously suggesting that the versioning system
should stop someone from doing something just because it might be stupid
in some particular cases? Besides checking out all of the tags could
potentially be a valid thing to do if you wanted to reoganize the repo
in a single commit (though there are other ways to do that too).
--
Ben Reser <ben@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Apr 3 01:30:53 2004