I like #2 (delete the trunk dirs and leave a README with pointers to the
git repos).
This will eliminate the possibility that someone will use old code or
think that the project has been abandoned.
-Ted
On 03/17/2015 01:58 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
Any other thoughts out there? We seem to have a mix of responses so
far, but mostly lots of silence ;)
Robbie
On 10 March 2015 at 10:05, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9 March 2015 at 16:24, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
As you probably know, we migrated the Proton and new JMS client code
to Git repositories last year. As part of the process the old
locations within the Subversion repo were frozen read-only and left in
place.
Some folks have been caught out by using the old stale locations, as
although we have updated our website with the new locations (and all
the commits@ traffic mentions the new locations) it isnt particularly
clear from the old contents themselves that they are no longer in use
(other than by realising the last commits were a while ago).
I noticed some documentation which indicated as Chair I should be able
to modify the access rights to the old locations, allowing us to edit
them and make things clearer. I checked with infra and that is indeed
the case, although they are also happy to do it for us depending on
the change (e.g move contents to an attic dir, add pointer file).
I wonder what people think we should do:
1. Add pointer files indicating the contents are no longer used and
directing to the Git repos.
2. Delete the trunk dirs, add pointer files to the Git repos.
3. Move the contents to an attic area, add pointer files to the Git
repos in old locations.
4. Delete the contents entirely, dont add pointers.
(The 'deleted' files will obviously remain in Subversion history)
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Robbie
I should have really added that we dont necessarily have to do the
same thing for both areas of code, i.e the new JMS client and Proton.
The former had the distinction of having no branches or tags, never
having been released, not being particularly usable in the form it was
in at the time, and being quite different from what is there these
days. For me, Option 3 or 4 make most sense for that old code, I dont
expect anyone is looking in there except people randomly broswing the
whole Qpid repo. For the Proton code, I'd probably go for options
1,3,2,4 in that order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
