David Abrahams wrote:
on Wed May 30 2007, Stefan Seefeld <seefeld-AT-sympatico.ca> wrote:
Rene Rivera wrote:
[boost-svn] 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) 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)
I'm still not convinced that the branching in the sandbox should happen outside the projects (as opposed to let each sandbox project organize its own substructure), but I don't have a strong opinion there.
I agree with Stefan. And that goes for the non-sandbox areas too. What is the point of pushing **library-specific** branches and tags up to the top level?
I agree too. Things that have different release cycles should not be mixed unnecessarily. Additionally, one could also set up a completely different repository for the sandbox, to make logs/history less cluttered. Has that been considered? /Marcus