Thanks for pointing this out, Rene.
boost stable (full boost tree here) devel (full boost tree here) branches my_branch (full boost tree here) cmake_a (full boost tree here) cmake_b (full boost tree here) tags boost_1_33_1 (full boost tree here) boost_1_34_0 (full boost tree here)
I don't like having everything live under "boost", because users will then just "svn co https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/boost" and wonder why they just downloaded 10GB. Not good. Instead, I prefer [boost-svn] stable devel branches my_branch (full boost tree here) cmake_a (full boost tree here) cmake_b (full boost tree here) tags boost_1_33_1 (full boost tree here) boost_1_34_0 (full boost tree here)
sandbox devel xml (partial boost tree here) explore (partial boost tree here) branches xml_b0 (partial boost tree here) explore_b0 (partial boost tree here) tags xml_for_review (partial boost tree here) explore_for_review (partial boost tree here)
Same complaint with the sandbox: I'd prefer that we put the latest and greatest into "sandbox", and have separate branches/tags, e.g., [boost-svn] sandbox xml explore sandbox-branches xml_b0 explore_b0 sandbox-tags xml_for_review explore_for_review - Doug