I think this is right. It allows us to do experimental compiler work
in devildog without impacting ringding. When we have a checkpoint in
the compiler work, we can integrate to ringding. My only question is
whether we really need a ringding as a branch, or if ringding work
should just take place directly in trunk, and we only branch it as we
approach release. (Maybe trunk should just be called ringding?)
I don't see any advantage of trunk sitting there idle. (It made
sense for legal's because the legal's release was so far in the
future, we could reasonably expect there to be additional releases
from trunk. But the next few releases are very close together -- I
think the additional burden of managing development on a branch is
more likely to be detrimental than helpful.)
On 2007-09-14, at 22:34 EDT, Benjamin Shine wrote:
The next step of svn moves are going to affect so much of
everything, and be so hard to undo, that I'd like to get a review
before I do it.
Here's what I'm gonna do:
$ svn move -m "Retiring old trunk by moving it to branches/3.x" \
http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/trunk \
http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/branches/3.x
$ svn move -m "Rechristening legals as trunk, because main
development is all going to happen in legals from now on." \
http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/branches/
legals \
http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/trunk
Then I'll create branches for devildog and ringding...
$ svn copy -m "Creating branch for ringding for work towards 4.1
release" \
http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/trunk \
http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/branches/ringding
$ svn copy -m "Creating branch for devildog for work towards swf9" \
http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/trunk \
http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/branches/devildog
And, while I'm at it, a branch for doctools:
$ svn copy -m "Creating paperpie branch for work on doctools" \
http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/trunk \
http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/branches/paperpie
Sound okay to you all?
-ben
