On 6-Dec-05, at 2:58 PM, Marc Sherman wrote:
> Mark Phippard wrote:
>> Matthew Wheaton <mdwheaton@gmail.com> wrote on 12/06/2005 02:35:55
>> PM:
>>
>>> Totally understood. I know that it would not be an atomic commit,
>>> but
>> the
>>> Subclipse plugin (or patch to it), could do what I described on
>>> each URL
>>
>>> (selected project, or folder), could it not, instead of repeating
>>> the
>>> operation for each folder ?
>>
>> Probably. I am not sure it is something I would want to do though.
>
> I agree. It goes against best practises for subversion. The OP
> really
> should restructure their repository to have the project dirs at root,
> with separate trunk/tags/branches for each project, if they're really
> independent.
The OP mentioned many independent projects that all make use of a
shared project. I see that pattern a lot,and I don't think it is a
bad practice in general.
I usually use svn:externals to build a workspace when I have that
situation. So I will have a ProjectXWorkspace folder in subversion
that pulls in 'ProjectX' and 'CommonCode' under a single parent
directory, the workspace folder in subversion may not have any
childred at all, just the svn:externals property, though sometimes it
has a build script or README. I only wish that svn:internals or
some other equivalent for server-side symbolic links would get
implemented so this would work a bit better. (no I don't have time
to submit a patch :) )
Scott
Received on Wed Dec 7 07:44:08 2005