On Friday 04 September 2009, Chris Cannam wrote: > I had a short discussion with Michael a while back about whether to > fix the structure of trunk (i.e. your proposal no. 1) and we decided > at the time not to press on with it...
What we (I) did was move everything out of trunk/ except for trunk/rosegarden itself. At one point, the directory formerly known as rosegarden/ became trunk/ for a short time. Check the commit logs to see how long it took me to decide to revert that change, and what justification I used. For one thing, I remember "svn switch" did not work as advertised. Then I found it really unsettling to check out trunk/ to get a directory called trunk/ instead of Rosegarden. Maybe this is backwards and stupid, but I've been working here a long time, and I'm used to the status quo. Then there are all the documents we'd have to update with the new URL. Do you even know where all of them are? I don't. I already tried the idea and promptly dumped it. Nobody noticed until Heikki got a new girlfriend named Git and started obsessing over her. Is this enough of a argument to compel us to go back and do the switch-over again? I don't think so personally. What else have you got for arguments, so it's not just about Git? I'm not anchored permanently to the spot on this issue, but I do have heavy weights around my ankles. -- D. Michael McIntyre ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
