How about this. Instead of putting these JMS+Qpid java tests under trunk/qpidtests (or jmstests or whatever), lets put them in a module under trunk/qpid/java/integrationtests (or jmstests or how about 'regressiontests'?). Trunk will be the definitive source for these non-version specific, non-branch specific tests, they will be pulled onto the M2/2.1 or other branches by setting up an svn:external onto trunk. That way they will always be the same accross all branches, and there will be no need to start putting stuff outside of trunk/qpid.
On 27/09/2007, Rupert Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Does svn provide some way to pin one directory under a branch, so that it > always tracks another? > > On 27/09/2007, Rupert Smith < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > That is also good suggestion Gordon. I guess the problem is that when > > branches are created, a copy will be taken from trunk by default. Nothing to > > stop us pruning a directory or two before committing a new branch, I > > suppose. > > > > On 27/09/2007, Gordon Sim < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Robert Godfrey wrote: > > > > at the moment I'm really not in favour of > > > > moving things "out" of qpid. > > > > > > I agree, moving them out of qpid either feels a little 'wrong' to me. > > > > > > > Moving them to a different directory under > > > > qpid... fine... Maybe you can spin that out at a later date. > > > > > > If they are all java based tests I don't really see the point of > > > moving > > > them out of the java dir either... unless you want them to be a > > > separately released artifact. > > > > > > I'm not _opposed_ either way, but it does sound like the solution to > > > the > > > problem described might just be to coordinate the process so that > > > updates to these tests are only made e.g. on trunk, from where they > > > can > > > be merged or run against other branches. > > > > > > > > > > > >
