Quoting Otavio Salvador (otavio@debian.org): > I'm still of opinion to choose another dir for them. I've proposed[1] Depends if we have many of them or not. All propositions you made were indeed OK for me. > few alternatives for directory names but noone commented on them; the > move has been done without a widely agreement from the team and people > that were involved discussing on the thread didn't agree too (me > included). Well, that doesn't really makes a problem for me. Action was needed, Frans did the action...and even enforced the discussion by doing so..:-)...What would have happened if he hadn't? Very probably a dying discussion, all of us going back to our various tasks and nothing made. I'm all for action when a topic emerges (this is even something I debated with Frans sometimes because I'm often even more for immediate and quick action than he is...). > It can be moved again, for sure, but as Joey has already spot this is > another thing to worry when migrating from svn to <put any other scm here>. > > This enforces the need of those svn moves being betther thought to > avoid double work. I don't really understand why multiples moves are a problem for a future SCM change but, well, I'm mostly ignorant when it comes at these complicated things.... About lost time: a "svn mv" is a matter of seconds, so we shouldn't worry that hard, I think. I still favor the move.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature