"Malte S. Stretz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Updates consists of branches per se, it probably won't ever have a > "trunk" (at least so it looks to me, I actually have no clue what that > directory is intended for -- can somebody who knoes please put a > README in there?). This is also not about branching and tagging but > about keeping stuff separate.
I've posted about the daily updates stuff several times on this list, including the directory hierarchy I would use. I'll add a README, though. :-) > I plan to start working on a plugin the next few weeks -- where shall > I put it? It depends on the plug-in. Maybe in trunk, maybe elsewhere. > This will be fixed in 1.1 [1] which is scheduled for mid-September, an > RC2 is currently available (though I don't know how stable it is). > This sounds near enough to discuss this now, doesn't it? I'm not in a hurry. ;-) I don't really mind having trunk and branches in the root of the tree be for the core project, I think that's fine. For other subprojects (none yet) or trees (site and updates), each should be able to not be branched or to be branched. I think the hierarchy is mostly okay now, but maybe when SVN is updated we agree on some small changes. I think it's important to note that the tree structure has never caused a single significant problem that this would solve. > We're all pretty quick giving -1s lately. Can't we discuss stuff first > before we throw vetoes into the ring? +0 maybe we can wait longer before veto, but I really meant it and I believe I had good technical reasons. :-) Daniel -- Daniel Quinlan http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/
