cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carsten Ziegeler" <>
Subject RE: [Vote] Repository Usage and Versioning
Date Fri, 23 Apr 2004 11:20:43 GMT
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Upayavira wrote:
> > Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> > 
> >> Rethinking our version structure and moving to subversion seems to 
> >> indicate that we should rethink our repository usage.
> >>
> >> I think we should use one repository per major version, so one 
> >> repository for all 2.x versions (except 2.0.x versions 
> that we leave 
> >> the way it is).
> >>  
> > I really think we should get away from this idea of multiple 
> > repositories. Subversion should, I believe, fix the 
> problems that led 
> > us to our multiple repository situation, and therefore we 
> should have 
> > just two repositories: code and site. (Of course we leave 
> 2.0 where it is).
> > 
> > If we don't do this, we loose all sorts of benefits, e.g. merging 
> > branches, lazy branching, etc, etc. And if there's no 'cost' in 
> > Subversion for branching (like there is in CVS), then why not do it?
> The fact is that in subversion, a branch is just a dir! So 
> this whole discussion about how many "repositories" to have 
> is moot, as we can copy
>   and move things round as many times as we want, all 
> retaining history and with *cheap* copies (IOW the same file 
> that is not modified is stored only once inside the repo and 
> referenced in two places).
> So we now have
>   cocoon-2.1 (repo)
>   cocoon-2.2 (repo)
> with SVN we will have this dir structure:
>   /cocoon
>    /trunk
>      /site
>      /src
>      ...
>    /branches
>       /cocoon2.1
>         /site
>         /src
>         ...
> Please read play with SVN a bit, as it has a different and 
> better way to handle these things.
With my proposal from above we would have the same with CVS, one
repository. I only mentioned our additional repositories (like
the site repository) and that it might make sense to have a clean
start for a new major version (Cocoon 3.0).

Actually, I don't care if we use subversion or cvs and as most of
us here are eagerly waiting to use svn, we should simply move to
subversion if we can agree on the general meaning of the above
proposals (or come to a different conclusion).


View raw message