On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 09:33:04 -0500 "William A. Rowe Jr." <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/5/2010 2:40 AM, Joe Orton wrote: > > Any objection to renaming the apr-util 1.5.x branch to "trunk"? It is > > the trunk for that tree now. > > -.5, because for the confusion it saves the dozen of us, many more dozens > will be confused by checking out apr and apr-util trunks as they have in > the past, only to be confronted by a checkout that doesn't work. Good point, well made. We're software developers, not coppicers. How many trunks do we need? But it does perhaps highlight a need to be clearer about where we are. Might another idea be to have an apr-util/trunk/ containing nothing but a README explaining the situation? -- Nick Kew
