David Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Actually, I think that if the httpd folks had heard Stas'
argument that modperl1, modperl1 and modperl-docs are three
unrelated projects,
modperl-1 differs from modperl-2 about as much as apache-1.3 differs from httpd-2.0. It looks to me like both httpd and apr followed the general pattern
$pmc / $project
to name their repositories, reserving the branch/ subdir for a project's historical versions. Yes, this means apache 1.3 is alongside 2.0 in httpd/httpd/branches.
This layout matches the fact that communities only develop one main codebase at a time, which is what
trunk/ represents. Historical versions are maintained in branches/, and actual releases are just subdirs
that appear in the tags/ subdir.
I suppose that explains very well the reasoning for httpd layout. httpd folks believe apache-1.3 is a history, and hiding it in a branch makes it easier to make it so.
Which is not the case with modperl. The fact that we aren't changing much mp1 is because we don't have the free hands to do so. This is not because mp1 is a history. so I won't try to hide it from the top level, into a mp2's sub-branch.
svn isn't cvs, it's closer to a generic filesystem that has versioning built into it. There's nothing special about the trunk/, tags/ and branches/ subdirs, except in how people agree to use them (or not).
Right. At the moment we have 3 projects in perl pmc. And those are modperl1, modperl2 and modperl-docs - each needs to be on top and not hidden in a sub-branch of some other project.
-- __________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
