Hi Bill,
Joe:
>> All seems OK to me, except possibly for your parenthetical statement
>> "one day we really need to move this to trunk".
>> We can't do this unless we give up the notion that WSJT, MAP65, WSPR,
>> WSPR-X, and WSJT-X are all part of the same "project". Historically,
>> the "trunk: of the project is WSJT.
Bill:
> Not a problem. Multi project repos usually have
> project1/{trunk,branches,tags} project2/{trunk,branches,tags} etc..
>
> The reason it is important is that most other source control systems
> have much stronger concepts for branches and tags and moving to them
> while maintaining all history is normally supported with tools if you
> have a conventional repo layout.
>
> It's not critical or urgent but an example use case is my situation. I
> use git-svn because it gives me lots of excellent git features while
> working with svn but because of our repo layout I can't easily have two
> projects checked out at once ...
I'm sure you have far more experience with such things than I do. Maybe
it's not just what you want, but I nearly always have the main branch
all of our programs -- WSJT, MAP65, WSPR, WSPR-X, and WSJT-X -- checked
out at once, and the SVN-versioned documentation for them as well.
Switching between them is no problem at all, I just open a new
command-line terminal and cd to the right place.
Quite possibly, I'm missing something here -- or don't know about some
important feature(s) that you want.
For the record, I have no reason not to like a layout such as
project1/{trunk,branches,tags} project2/{trunk,branches,tags} etc.,
except that it's not what we have now -- and as yet I don't appreciate
why it might be better.
Bill:
> because it expects everything to reside in
> the trunk with only branches and tags in their respective locations. For
> example if I want to build the docs I have to switch my working tree to
> docs, another branch, which hides the branch I was on 'wsjtx' while I'm
> there. This is the main reason that I don't edit the docs or contribute
> to other JT projects as it is so painful to coerce git-svn to bend the
> standard layout rules.
If there's a significant reason why it's inconvenient for you to edit
the docs or contribute to the other JT programs, we should certainly
address it. But since I don't find such multi-tasking inconvenient at
all, I need to better understand the problem.
-- 73, Joe, K1JT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer
Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports
Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper
Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
