> For what it's worth, here are my two cents on svn-bp layouts: > - it's easier to only manage the debian/ dir in SVN (mergeWithUpstream) > mode, and is really a clean way of working on Debian packages (except > it forces you to have patches below debian/ instead of directly in > the .diff.gz) Agreed. But I would argue that it is better to have patches below debian, as it makes them easier to manage, and easier to spearate by type. There are plenty of handy tools that make this easier. > - in general, you don't grab old packages out of the SVN, so tagging > each package upload or upstream release doesn't add a lot; instead, I > found the "per-dist" layout quite useful (pkg-gnome uses a bit of > that), top-level dirs are simply: > experimental/ > unstable/ > stable/ While the tags may not always be required, they are very cheap, and require no explicit management when svn-upgrade is used. That said, if we were to go with your proposal, I would prefer to see it implemented as tags. The downside in any case is added manual intervention, or the creation of scripts to do this for us, which is why my personal preference would be to stick with svn-upgrade. cheers, Charles -- Every Sheba Wants a sheik Strong of muscle Smooth of cheek Burma-Shave http://burma-shave.org/jingles/1937/every
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature