[openbeos-build-team] Re: Migration

  • From: "Ingo Weinhold" <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos-build-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 14:12:17 CEST (+0200)

> > >>In fact, the directory is a *temporary thing*, anyway. The 
> > > > directory
> > >will go away once SF moves things around for us.
> > >
> > >Huh?  Why?  I *like* the idea of having a root directory in the
> > >repository.
> > 
> > I guess we could ask them to keep it.
> > For individuals looking at CVS, there will be one root level 
> > directory "extra".
> > OTOH, decompressing it to a directory is cleaner. Anyone else have 
> > thoughts?
> 
> Another plus is that we could later have obvious stable releases in 
> the 
> CVS tree as well, if we would want to do such a thing (i.e. /current, 
> /r1, /r1.2, /r2, etc). Of course, we could do this with tags as well, 
> couldn't we? But then, having the directories sitting around would 
> make 
> it more obvious to those of us who are less familiar with CVS. :-)

Please, please, don't let us work around existing CVS features, even if 
that means, that some people need to read the CVS docs. Tags are the 
tool of choice for bundling the files belonging to a certain version. 
To have a separate directory for an older version doesn't make any 
sense, as the sources won't be modified anymore. So you can as well 
make a source archive available for download, and people won't have to 
deal with CVS at all. And in case the sources of the last release need 
to be fixed, it is a great benefit to have them in the same tree as the 
bleeding edge version, because then the changes can easily be merged 
into the latter one.

CU, Ingo



Other related posts: