Yes. :)
Don
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 12:08:35 -0800, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 11:50:43 -0800, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean and how refactoring is enhanced by using one
> > trunk. I'm just suggesting giving each subpro
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 11:50:43 -0800, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I'm not sure what you mean and how refactoring is enhanced by using one
> trunk. I'm just suggesting giving each subproject its own structure, but
> they would all be in the same repository, and could be all checked ou
I'm not sure what you mean and how refactoring is enhanced by using one
trunk. I'm just suggesting giving each subproject its own structure, but
they would all be in the same repository, and could be all checked out at
one shot by checking out struts/
Don
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 10:03:27 -0800, Mart
One of the initial reasons for having one trunk / branches / tags
group, rather than several, was the desire to be able to refactor
across artifacts. If that is still retained with the proposal below,
then I'm fine with it. Otherwise, I think we need to consider it a bit
more.
--
Martin Cooper
O
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 15:19:02 -0800, Craig McClanahan wrote:
> Agree that it's easy to move things around ... but I've got a
> question -- does this still all end up under our single canonical
> SVN URL (https://svn.apache.org/asf/struts)?
Yes. If a developer wants the whole enchilada, they can sta
At 9:09 PM -0800 11/5/04, Craig McClanahan wrote:
Only one minor question ... do we care about distinguishing proposals
(like shale or jericho) versus things that are accepted parts of
Struts, or is that just an issue of whether we ever actually release
something or not? I'm ok either way.
My inst
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 15:26:45 -0800, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a perfect world...
>
> svn.apache.org/asf/struts
> /core
> /trunk
> /branches
> /tags
> /faces
> /trunk
> /branches
> /tags
> /bsf
> /trunk
> /branches
> /tags
> /flow
> /t
In a perfect world...
svn.apache.org/asf/struts
/core
/trunk
/branches
/tags
/faces
/trunk
/branches
/tags
/bsf
/trunk
/branches
/tags
/flow
/trunk
/branches
/tags
Therefore, we would then instruct folks that want to work on Struts core
to use http://svn.apa
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:01:33 -0800, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, actually, it would be a simple matter of a couple of "svn move"
> commands. They are quick, and can be easily redone later if we change
> our minds.
Agree that it's easy to move things around ... but I've got a question
No, actually, it would be a simple matter of a couple of "svn move"
commands. They are quick, and can be easily redone later if we change
our minds.
Don
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 07:42:44 -0600, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 9:52 PM -0800 11/4/04, Don Brown wrote:
> >If so, why is strut
At 9:52 PM -0800 11/4/04, Don Brown wrote:
If so, why is struts-faces located in /trunk/ and therefore branched and
tagged along with Struts core? Shouldn't it have its own
trunk/branches/tags triad for its own release cycles?
+1
Just curious, do we need to ask someone in [EMAIL PROTECTED] to
do
+1
On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:52:31 -0800 (PST), Don Brown wrote:
> Perhaps this has already been discussed, but I couldn't find
> anything about it
>
> How will we organize Struts subprojects in the repository? As I
> understand it, Struts subprojects are projects that are intimately
> associate
Perhaps this has already been discussed, but I couldn't find anything
about it
How will we organize Struts subprojects in the repository? As I
understand it, Struts subprojects are projects that are intimately
associated with Struts, yet have their own release cycle. The prime
example being
13 matches
Mail list logo
