On 07 Oct 2010, at 12:22 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
These choices seem skewed to me. "apr is apr-util/trunk" is a different concept than "rename 1.5.x to trunk." Conceptually, "apr is apr-util trunk" whatever we decide.
I disagree, in the past, we had two projects, each with an independent trunk and release cycle, one called apr, the other called apr-util. We have chosen to retire the apr-util project, and have copied the functionality into apr, but that doesn't make the apr-util project go away.
We will still need to make releases on apr-util in the v1.x series, and we may need to bump v1.3 to v1.4, etc. For this, we need a properly functional trunk, otherwise those following the standard svn conventions face problems.
Regards, Graham --
