Am 23.10.2005 um 05:20 schrieb Adam Fedor:
/libs/base/{trunk,tags,branches}
/libs/gui/{trunk,tags,branches}
/libs/Renaissance/{trunk,tags,branches}
/apps/Gorm/{trunk,tags,branches}
/apps/gworkspace/{trunk,tags,branches}
and so on.
We could then have something like:
/modules/dev-apps
/modules/core
/modules/dev-libs
Sure. but I am not very familiar with svn.
Subversion doesn't enforce any directory layout at all. Tags,
branches and copies are all "cheap" and are all the same: a bunch of
references in a new directory to what you have copied/tagged/
branched. To me, it's unclear why there's still made a difference
between tags and branches[1], but that's how the Subversion book
recommends it and it seems to be widely accepted.
Unlike CVS, Subversion numbers versions throughout the whole
repository. A bunch of files checked out have always the same
version; files get higher version numbers even without being changed.
As a result, one should tend to make small repositories, i.e. one for
each app, one for each tool, one for each lib.
That's how I understand it,
Markus
[1] IMHO, a layout like /path/to/part/{trunk,releases,branches} might
throw away some CVS relicts but fit better into reality.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter
http://www.jump-ing.de/
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
Gnustep-dev@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
