commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig R. McClanahan" <>
Subject Re: Removal of sandboxed versions?
Date Sat, 22 Jun 2002 18:24:25 GMT

On Sat, 22 Jun 2002, James Strachan wrote:

> Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 18:10:51 +0100
> From: James Strachan <>
> Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <>
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <>
> Subject: Re: Removal of sandboxed versions?
> From: "bob mcwhirter" <>
> > > Should the commons.sandbox.cli be removed from cvs?
> >
> > +1
> >
> > > Is the plan to just empty the sandboxed version and leave a structure?
> > > When we move something from sandbox to commons, do we move and tweak the
> > > cvs repository, thus keeping a valid history, or do we import a new one?
> >
> > I'd say yes.  I've personally been bitten by looking in the sandbox for
> > code, and only realizing that I wasn't using the latest much later, after
> > looking in the non-sandbox commons.
> Both betwixt and cli moved to commons and the sandbox copies were deleted;
> but the structure remained, which is normal CVS stuff. Maybe we could zap
> the RCS files to permanently remove the structure from the sandbox?
> There's a bunch of old structures still around we could zap: betwixt, cli,
> digester, latka, logging, modeler.

Doing cvs delete on all the files of moved packages is always a good idea.
When you update your local sandbox, do "cvs update -dP" and you won't have
those obsolete projects.

IMHO, physically pruning the directories out of /home/cvs is almost always
a really bad idea, because you lose the ability to ever restore the
complete state of the repository as of a fixed date or tag.  You can make
a case that nobody should have ever done this for sandbox directories
anyway, but pruning is a bad habit to get into.

> James


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message