Re: Jakarta Commons Structure rehashed

[Mark R. Diggory]

I tend to agree. I only work with a few commons components at a time. 
And when using something like Eclipse one can checkout multiple projects 
 by selecting them all. its not that big a deal. Plus from a management 
standpoint, the component is the atomic unit of the commons, organizing 
around that is logical.

+1 on A
-Mark
David Graham wrote:
Option B doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.  Most people are
interested in only a few commons projects so each having their own trunk,
tags, and branches makes sense.  Struts lays out its subprojects using
Option A:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/struts/
David
--- Tim O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I don't think we ever settled this question. 

Which SVN structure are we interested in?
** Option A:
jakarta/
   commons/
       digester/
           trunk/
           tags/
           branches/
       beanutils/
           trunk/
           tags/
           branches/
OR 

** Option B:
jakarta/
   commons/
       trunk/
           digester/
           beanutils/
       tags/
           digester/
           beanutils/
       branches/
           digester/
           beanutils/


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more. 
http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center
http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]