Mike Kupfer wrote: > I can't remember if this got discussed on the project list or on IRC. A > quick check in the list archives didn't turn up anything, so... > > Rich and I (and I imagine Ken, too) continue to bump into the question > of how we will implement onnv-clone and the per-build snapshots. We > could continue the Teamware practice of using a separate repository, or > we could theoretically use tags (with branches being needed for the > per-build snapshots when there is a respin). > > Given where we are in the project, I think we need to resolve this > question and move forward. And since we understand how to make > everything work with separate repos, and we don't really have time to > experiment with the tags approach, I think we should go with separate > repositories for the clone and for the build snapshots. > > If you've got questions or concerns, now would be a good time to speak > up. ;-) >
I think separate repos is better if only because it keeps the main onnv-gate branch-free and all in one head. Certain assumptions about the space/time continuum are only valid in a single headed repo. And it would ease the Teamware->Mercurial transition. Plus, there's always time in the future to grow heads. Once a head is grown, it's harder to chop off. -steve -- stephen lau | stevel at opensolaris.org | www.whacked.net
