Clay Leeds wrote: > Does it make sense for xml-fop dev'ers to standardize on a particular > directory structure for CVS? It seems that this problem might have been > averted had Glen used what I was the standard directory structure for > xml-fop development: for development purposes it is best if xml-fop builds > be built from under the xml-fop/ directory. If so, some sort of "standard" > directory structure might be a good addition to the Fop-Dev FAQ. > > DISCLAIMER: If this doesn't make sense (me being something of a > CVS-newbie), please disregard. I'm not trying to be picky here, just > hoping to learn whether this thought process might improve efficiency for > [PATCH] submissions. ;-)
I think most developers probably do check out the entire xml-fop module. The fact that someone does not *probably* means that they have a good reason for doing it differently. IMO, this is one of those things that, while perhaps nominally helpful, would actually be counter-productive because of the confusion it would add. Victor Mote
