* David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> [2005-02-02 14:28]:
Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu> writes:
David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
I am just posting this here to alert those who look at subject lines to what we're discussing. To review the whole discussion, see http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3cuk6pujjyu.fsf%40boost%2dco...
One thread you might find interesting
http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?group=gmane.comp.version-control.subversion.devel&article=53583
It talks about the troubles Mono had in going from CVS to Subversion. YMMV.
I agree, it's very interesting. I recommend that everyone interested in the transition read at least the first message in that thread.
I'm not sure where to chime in, but I was just attempting to check out one of the Jakarta Commons sub-projects. Their directory structure is such that, if you want to checkout all of commons, you cant simply checkout trunk/commons, because you'll checkout every branch, ever. It looks like this: /huge-library-project /library-1 /trunk /BRANCH_1 /BRANCH_1_1 /BRANCH_1_2 ... /library-2 /trunk /RELEASE_2_0 /RC_2_0 /RC_2_1 ... ... Might be easier to manage a specific library, but it's hard on the non-commiter that want's to build from source control. In any case, I hope you'll consider carefully, the project structure when you move away from the tag based system in CVS. -- Alan Gutierrez - alan@engrm.com