On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 01:54:50PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 10:24:25AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > Well, my commit did not change anything about that, it only moved from > > > /trunk/packages/ledit/trunk/debian/... > > > to > > > /trunk/packages/ledit/debian/... > > Yeah, i know. > > So why did you complain? :-) > > > > Doing so will turn once more in a lot of disk usage, but see below. > > No, because the amount of branches is usually small, in the number of 2-3 at > > most. you need to not forget to erase them when you are done with them > > though. > > > > The tags, by nature, are numerous and will grow more as time passes. They > > have > > no vocation to be modified also, but copied back in a branch if need be. > > Agreed. > > > Like said, i doubt there are many branches, so i would keep them at toplevel > > for now. > > Ok, let's go for it. > > I personally like not to have a trunk/ dir inside per-package dir and > have branch subdir, e.g. sarge/, side by side debian/ subdir ...
I don't know, but i don't really like this, and i don't really see the interest of this over the other method. Let's say we have : a/debian a/orig.tarball a/sarge/debian a/sarge/orig.tarball And you suddenly notice that you want to move the current stuff in a branch, and revert to the sarge stuff. If we have like i propose : a/sarge/debian|orig a/trunk/debian|orig you just do : svn mv a/trunk a/not-good svn mv a/sarge a/trunk Which sounds easier than doing it the other way. Also, i wonder how the opkg-buildpackage tool will react to branches inside the main branch, and i have the feeling that they will all be copied inside the package that is being built. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
