No, it'd still be the case - an update isn't sufficient. I'd have to get a brand-new checkout of httpd because my local working copy would refer to httpd-2.0. At best, I might be able to run a script to tweak my CVS directories.Ken's change for htdocs was really a pita because existing checkouts were simply broken. This isn't the case for this schema. You update when you need to commit (and the system's informed you you cannot commit.) Planned chaos rather than unanticipated chaos.
I'd prefer that we start 2.1 on a new repository that doesn't have "2.0" in the name. Yes, that means losing history of 2.0 in that repository. So, be it. It's not all that important, and we've done this at every branch point before. Some of the operations take too long as it is because of the large history of some files.
Regardless, whatever we do must be planned and agreed to ahead of time. -- justin
