In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Noel J. Bergman" w rites: >We don't version Commons as a single component, and I don't know that we >want to force everyone to always take every single component. Someone >wanting to build all of Commons is not the norm.
I didn't want to reopen the issue. I was merely making an ancillary comment. However, the flatter layout does not version Commons as a single component. It's all dictated by the procedures one follows. There's no difference between checking out https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/commons/foo/trunk and https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/commons/trunk/foo or between tagging https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/commons/foo/tags/foo-x.x.x and https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/commons/tags/foo-x.x.x The difference is all in one's head. Whether one is uncomfortable with a tag tree filled with lots of tags is a matter of personal preference and one I understand. But conceptually, and in terms of release procedures and script writing, there's no technical difference (everything is still versioned separately). Anyway, please stop commenting on this. I was rambling late at night without having read the thread from its start and I apologize for the distraction given the merely observational nature of my comment. I'm a happy camper with the currently proposed layout. The intent of my email was to offer a suggestion regarding the mention of symbolic links, assuming I understood what was being discussed. daniel --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
