I just want to point out some thoughts of mine about the often discussed
We are currently introducing subversion in our development department with
30 developers, at the moment around 8 people use the system, and we are
getting more and more of them into the system (Apache, BDB).
Being the admin of the system, I read all the posts about the structure
quite interested and did not like the ide of having a structure like
It just seemed a bit strange to have the same project spread in several
folders all around the repository. So we decided to have the following
Now, after having around 20 projects in the database we have changed to
the first layout.
The second layout is the more straight forward one, the one, I would
organize projects on my harddisk, it seems more natural, and for a small
number of projects it is the better one.
Having many projects, the second structure is easier to handle both for
the developer and the admin. If you check out the complete project in the
first layout, you either get the whole thing including all tags and
branches, or you have to check out all single subfolders (we have e.g.
/documentation and /source). One would have to check all subfolders out
one by one. Using the second structure, one checks out the trunk and
doesn't get any clutter.
The administration is easier, especially the access rights management (no
commits to /tags, allowing the access to /release for the people who sell
the stuff or even customers and such).
The project folder in /trunk looks a loot cleaner without having /tags
/branches /release and such there.
Thanks to subversion it was possible to restructure our database without
loosing any history and even 'on the fly', the developers had just to
'switch' to another url.
I want to point out that this is just my opinion and that other people
will have another one and will structure the repository differently.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Fri Apr 29 10:34:51 2005