Re: on per-package trunk/ directory
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 09:05:34AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:35:15PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > There are three kind of dirs for each package, or rather two, tags and
> > branches, one of the branches being the main branch called trunk upto now.
>
> I'm not saying that we don't need tags/ and brunches/. I'm only saying
> that two nested "trunk" path components are overkilling and useless, as
> in:
>
> /trunk/packages/ledit/trunk/debian/...
> ^^^^^ ^^^^^
>
> IMO, we can happily live with /trunk/packages/ledit/debian/ and once we
> need tags (or branches), store them in:
>
> /tags/packages/ledit/6.6.6/debian/...
This, one, yes.
> or
>
> /branches/packages/ledit/6.6.6/debian/...
This one i believe (and from experience dealing with branches) is overkill,
and it is best suited to have it in the same dir as trunk.
/trunk/packages/ledit/sid/debian
/trunk/packages/ledit/sarge/debian
/trunk/packages/ledit/3.08/debian
And so on. but we can keep the trunk dir, or call it head, or even make head a
symlink to the currently developing stuff (don't know how subversion deals
with symlinks though).
> > So we could move our trunk dirs to sid, for example.
>
> Well, sid will almost always be the trunk since we usually continue
> development there. Non-sid stuff IMO should be kept in tags/ or
> branches/ (even if in svn branches are pretty useless IMO).
Exact, but having branches in some other random place is cumbersome, because
you do work on them, while tags are something you do and forget.
I saved a couple GB of disk space when i erased my tags dir, so i believe it
is worth it, be it only for a practical reason.
But again, i did in other projects, both the two above organizations, and i
believe that having the branches in the main dir is the better one.
Also, you would do :
svn co ..../trunk OCAML-SVN
or something such, so the toplevel trunk component will not be visible to you
at all, only to the repo.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: