Ate Douma wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
It seems that everyone is OK with moving the Subversion 1.1-286-trunk-merge branch to the SVN trunk. I intend on doing that on Monday night (East Coast USA time), so please voice your comments and concerns by that time. Here's my basic plan. Since I am not an Subversion guru, please comment or correct me if I am wrong. 1. SVN tag the current trunk. I'm not sure how to name this tag so it is not confused with other tags in Subversion that are official releases. Suggested names are appreciated.
2. SVN delete the trunk.
3. Immediately svn copy the 1.1-286-trunk-merge-branch to the trunk. I am aware that there is a 'SVN move' option, but I want to make sure that things go OK, so I'd rather copy and diff the copy with the old branch as a double check.
Well, you can do that, but I think by copying we might lose the history recorded against the branch which I definitely think is a bad idea.
If you move it, all its history is moved along.
In my experience, moving is painless and harmless with svn as long as you do it directly on the server, *don't* try to do it locally and commit that.

I agree, it should be a server-side operation. SVN history should be preserved no matter if it is a copy or a move. A move is just an 'Add' followed by a 'Delete' where a copy is just an 'Add'. Still, performing a move versus a copy is cleaner.

3. Create a tag when Pluto is submitted with the JSR-286 specification as the JSR-286 Reference Implementation to the Java Community Process for approval. Ate has suggested that we do this. We could call this tag JSR286-RI (other suggested names are welcome). I'm not sure of the timing of this (please comment Stefan)?
PJSR286-RI sounds fine, +1

sounds good to me too.

In general I'm concerned about the history issues (I'm more concerned that all these branches sprouted up to begin with). The good news is that when those branches are removed, they aren't truly gone. They are still available in previous revisions of the repository, even if the branch is gone in current and future revisions of the repository.

Elliot

Reply via email to