db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Brian W. Fitzpatrick" <f...@apache.org>
Subject Re: derby repository structure
Date Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:45:10 GMT

On Aug 19, 2004, at 6:58 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> /repos/foo/tags
> /repos/foo/branches/B1/file.name
> /repos/foo/trunk/file.name
>
> the derby project has at least two discrete parts: derby itself, and
> the site web pages.  currently the module is set up (with prefix
> '/repos/asf/incubator/') as:
>
> derby/code/{trunk,tags,branches}
> derby/site/{trunk,tags,branches}
>
> some questions have been raised about whether this is the best  
> structure;
> an alternative would be:
>
> derby/{trunk,tags,branches}/
> derby/{trunk,tags,branches}/site
>
> making the site just another piece of the overall project.
>
> which layout do you think is better?

Hello everyone, RoUS has asked me to throw in my 2 cents here.

I don't know that either one is *better*, but I prefer to have  
everything in one place, so I would place *all* files related to a  
single project (Derby, in this case) under trunk--I find it's better to  
have everything in one place in one part of the repository.  This is  
how the repository for Subversion itself is laid out  
(http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/)... there's a 'www' directory under  
trunk.

Also, see the section of the Subversion book on "Repository Layout"  
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/svnbook/ch05s04.html#svn-ch-5-sect-6.1

-Fitz

PS Be aware that this can easily turn into a bikeshed discussion  
(http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/ 
misc.html#BIKESHED-PAINTING).  :-)


Mime
View raw message