From kde-core-devel Thu Mar 31 13:36:40 2005 From: Stephan Kulow Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:36:40 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: SVN timing Message-Id: <200503311536.41454.coolo () kde ! org> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=111227611409042 Am Mittwoch 23 März 2005 12:42 schrieb Thiago Macieira: > 1) /trunk/kdelibs vs /trunk/KDE/kdelibs I don't like a cluttered trunk - sorting apps into modules is already artificial enough. We could discuss moving kdeplayground-admin into kdeplayground/kdeadmin - but even that I don't really like. We have 77 modules so far in svn.kde.org, that's quite a lot but still easy to overview. Easier than wondering if qt-copy is KDE/ or misc/ when browsing. > > 2) /work/work-branch vs /branches/work/work-branch > vs /branches/appname/work-branch For branches I agree. We have 155 branches without unlabeled ones. That's already a lot and they are pretty hard to overview. But if you add /branches/appname you're not easing to find a branch. So I would split /branches into /branches/work and /branches/maintaince - this should split the list of branches enough and I can script it very easily to move the branches after the import. But so far this whole layout discussion is between you and me. No-one else seems to have an oppinion about it ;( > > 3) admin with svn:external vs admin with symlinks symlinks are the only real solution as long as relative properties do not work (and I guess they would require a newer client version). Of course they have plenty of disadvantages but also quite some advantages. I'd like to add: 5) to migrate CVSROOT and delete it afterwards or ignore it? The history of it is part of the history of KDE's cvs so it's a bad sad, but of course it doesn't serve any good. Greetings, Stephan