So then, we have five +1s on the following directory structure: /branches (as required) /tags */java **/releases ***/2.1.0 */cs **/releases ***/1.5.0 /trunk */site */cs **/mapper **/dao **/docs **/npetshop **/tutorial */java **/mapper **/dao **/docs **/jpetstore
With the understanding that we won't be moving DAO out just yet (there's a bit of effort there). Can we move forward with this? Cheers, Clinton On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 07:21:21 -0500, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just to recap, > > * I'd suggest that the SVN structure represent the subproject/release > structure, where the subprojects are > > ** java/mapper > ** java/dao > ** java/docs > ** java/jpetshore > > ** cs/mapper > ** cs/dao > ** cs/docs > ** cs/npetshop > ** cs/tutorial > > ** site > > If we later change the release structure, we can change the SVN structure > to match, since moving things around in Subversion is cheap. > > * I'd suggest that we tag each subproject release before it is rolled. > Ideally, the tag should identify exactly what goes into a given subproject > release. > > * Obviously, I don't care if we keep the tags in subdirectories or in a > master directory at the top. My only concern is that it is easy to tag only > the resources that pertain to a given release. > > * I haven't done any SVN tagging myself, but someone who does said it was > easier to create the tags if we we used a > > /$subproject > ./tag > ./trunk > > structure. Of course, it might be just as easy to keep them all at the > root. I haven't had a chance to try yet. > > * If someone wants to forward this post to a SVN guru, that would work for me > :) > > It will be a couple of days before the repos are rolled over, and we don't > have to start shuffling things around right away, so time is not of the > essence. > > -Ted. > >
