Hi Michael,
> Correct. In fact, a "best practice" for proper use of externals would
> demand that all externals definitions specify a particular revision so
> the a project can a) choose more intelligently when to "upgrade" to a
> newer snapshot of the external thing, and b) so that the version
> history of the main and external repositories can be more tightly
> coupled, allowing for backdates which are guaranteed to produce
> accurate results.
We develop drivers for embedded systems. We have to support several
different operating systems and hardware platforms, keeping them in
step.
The build environment forces us to put our common code in a certain
place
in each tree. We need to keep all variants synchronised, with the same
features in each. Most of our work is done in the common code and is
applicable to all environments.
We use externals to link in our common code modules to the appropriate
places in the tree. Linking to tagged revisions is not appropriate for
us since we need to be at the same point for all platforms/OSes. If
that is not how externals are to be used, what is the status
of the repository-internal linking (svn:internals, relative
svn:externals
or whatever other scheme is proposed)?
Cheers,
Ian Brockbank
Edinburgh, Scotland
ian@scottishdance.net
http://www.scottishdance.net/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jun 29 14:35:34 2005