On 11/7/05, Jesse Erlbaum <jesse@erlbaum.net> wrote:
> Hi All --
>
> Just thought I'd get your feedback on my ultimate solution to the
> problem.
>
> > Repository: "CLIENT_A"
> > Modules: "PROJ_1", "PROJ_2", "PROJ_3", "PROJ_4", "PROJ_5"
> >
> > This way I can set UNIX permission such that all users who work with
> > Client A have access to all the projects.
> >
> > My question is thus: Is it better to put "branches", "tags", and
> > "trunk" directories at the repository level, or at the project level?
>
>
> Here's what I went with -- using the example above:
>
> CLIENT_A/branches/
> CLIENT_A/tags/
> CLIENT_A/PROJ_1/
> CLIENT_A/PROJ_2/
> CLIENT_A/PROJ_3/
> CLIENT_A/PROJ_4/
> CLIENT_A/PROJ_5/
>
>
> Notes:
> * No "trunk" directory. Seemed redundant. Whatever is in a "PROJ_X"
> directory is the latest version -- aka, "trunk" (aka "HEAD").
> * No project dir branches and tags. To tag or branch I'll just copy
> to the client-level directories.
>
>
> The goal is to allow the projects to be "semi independent". A user can
> work on just one, or on all of them. Conceivably, you could tag/branch
> all the projects at once, or just one project. It seemed to be the best
> of all worlds.
>
>
> What do you all think? And problems you can foresee?
>
Unless you want to check out the whole repos, you will not be able to
get atomic commits across projects, since svn co -N is currently
broken.
Also hand building branches like you are talking about can be
disk intensive since they'll need to be done client-side, unless you
feel like using some scripting tools to combine multiple commands
into a single transaction (for which there are tools).
But in the end, it is whatever fits your workflow best. Work is
currently underway to fix non-recursive checkouts, so that may
not be an issue for long.
Josh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Nov 7 23:26:24 2005