On Thu, 2007-14-06 at 14:01 -0500, Rene Rivera wrote:
Nicola Musatti wrote:
Hallo, was a final decision taken on what should the repository structure be?
No, AFAIK.
I was thinking this morning about how it could be structured given the goal of independent library version releases + some stable set of code that people can use to have all of the up-to-date released libraries. So the up-to-date "trunk" which people can always svn co to get the latest stable: /trunk /libs /fusion => svn:externals svn://boostsvn/svn/fusion/trunk/libs/fusion /thread => svn:externals svn://boostsvn/svn/threads/trunk/libs/thread ... etc ... /boost fusion/ include/ boost => svn:externals svn://boostsvn/svn/fusion/trunk/boost I think the structure of the individual repositories could be discerned from that. So if a user wants "latest up-to-date stuff" they do: svn co /path/to/trunk If a fusion developer wants to work on his library: svn co /path/to/trunk cd fusion svn switch svn://boostsvn/svn/fusion/trunk/libs/fusion cd .. cd boost/fusion svn switch svn://boostsvn/svn/fusion/trunk/boost You would need minor changes to the Jamfiles to make this work. To make a new release of his library, the developer would merge his branch into trunk and notify the appropriate authorities. I'm sure there are many things I have missed like regressions and stuff but I think the basic idea should work. But it can still be totally wrong and in fantasy land. Sohail