Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > On top level we should only have the active non-personal branches.
| > Personal branches should be moved to 'personal'¹ some appropriate
| > place. Obosolete branches shoudl be moved to 'obsolete'² (I don't
| > want to delete them, they would be so hard to find later then.)
|
| Perhaps. Do any of these contain stuff we still want to have a look at?
| I certainly plan to have my new project branches with a limited lifetime
| (and SVN never "really" deletes anything :-)
Whatever is in your 'personal' you can do whatever you want to.
| > One thing with subversion is that it is a lot easier to use branches,
| > and they are not slow as in cvs. I will at least create 5-8 branches
| > for myself. Stuff I work with, ideas, etc.
| >
| > I also want to do some reorganization with the tags.
| >
| > ¹ Or propose abetter name please.
|
| No... "personal" is it. So I understand this is really a sandbox thing;
| stuff intended to make it to the main tree should be in named
| project/feature branches on top level?
No...(or maybe... I have a slight problem in grokking your sentence
:-) )
I intend this for personal branches... stuff you work on that
may never really be, or stuff that might evolve to become a feature.
(Then it can be moved out of the 'personal' tree)
For example I have these wc that I work on from time to time:
lyx-delete
lyx-unicode
lyx-upboost
lyx-wc
lyx-work
lyx-any
lyx-aslib
lyx-boost
lyx-client
lyx-exceptions
lyx-nonrecursive
lyx-nvi
lyx-up
lyx-utf8
lyx-xml
The problem for me is that I have spread these out over three boxes...
(and have duplicates as well...) Since branching is so cheap in
subversion I want to also keep the stuff I work on there. This then
also makes it possible for others to see and comment on, as well as
know what I am looking at. Or even take over and bring the idea
further on.
Several of these might never become a feature or even near trunk.
Perhaps 'sandbox' is the right name... but I do not really like it.
--
Lgb
