Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Derby Development" <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Message-ID: <4124F971.4070408@debrunners.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:03:13 -0700
From: Daniel John Debrunner <djd@debrunners.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20031008
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Derby Development <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Subject: Re: derby repository structure
References: <412495C8.7030003@Golux.Com>
 <9BB3D42C-F1DD-11D8-939E-000393B4C1D8@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <9BB3D42C-F1DD-11D8-939E-000393B4C1D8@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Brian W. Fitzpatrick wrote:

| 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.


I know I regretted we took the single approach for Cloudscape as a
branch then contained items that logically should not be branched, such
as functional specifications. However it was never a problem since
people just knew to always use/modify the main (trunk) version of those
files.

Dan.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFBJPlxIv0S4qsbfuQRAvw+AKDCrYSqnctOHVB+iaDe5fCVCeEHbwCdEnCc
cUVc1PVLC0t1uXO9l7OKog0=
=3rO6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----