Re: SVN layout
> But right now there are two problems that need to be resolved
> so we know where things are supposed to go.
>
> 1. Should linux-2.6 go in trunk/kernel/ or just trunk.
> Given that we no longer need source and per-arch directories,
> it seems logical to just move it up to trunk/
> But thats a bit of a departure from the old model, and
> burns holes in some peoples brains.
The old layout burned holes in my brain, so I'd surely welcome this ;-)
> 2. If we assume that we have two versions of linux-2.6, one based
> on the current upstream (and likely in sid/testing) and one
> based on some upstream rc releases (and likely in experimental)
> where should these two directories go. The main two camps seem to be:
>
> a) They are both being developled, so we may as well have them in
> trunk as linux-2.6 and linux-2.6-experimental, or something like
> that. We always had multiple versions in trunk in the past,
> and no one complained.
This is fine with me. Just make sure -experimental is actually branched
of linux-2.6 so svns primitive merging has a chance to work.
> b) Everything must come off trunk. Only the very leading edge can be
> in trunk. If the sid version isn't that then it should
> go under branches, and if that happens to be the version in sid,
> it should be branches/dists/sid/linux-2.6 (or
> branches/dists/sid/kernel/linux-2.6, depending on 1) above).
>
> Personally, in the context of the two questions above, I advocate
> trunk/linux-2.6
> trunk/linux-2.6-experimental
<aol>me too!</aol>
Reply to: