On 3/22/07, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 22, 2007, at 10:21 AM, Raymond Feng wrote: > +1. > > I think it's in line with the proposal in my response to Meeraj. > > One question: For a bundle to reference a module in the Tuscany > source tree, do we really have to copy (or use svn:externals > property) if it points to a location (under trunk, tags, or > branches) in the Tuscany tree? I think a relative path for the > <module> will work. It will. The difference would be that with a ../.. type relative path someone can't just check out the assembly module, they need to check out the whole tree from some common root. With an external they could just check out the assembly module and the source for the dependency would be checked out as well. Of course, then they might have multiple copies of the dependency source to manage. Either works and it would up to the users of the assembly module to choose which style they prefer. -- Jeremy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sounds like a good compromise to me
<stupidquestion> When you talk about flattening the module hierarchy do you mean this literally in svn (which I like the sound of as I can never find anything in all the nested dirs - my inexperience showing) or is this some virtual flattening? </stupidquestion> Simon
