incubator-jena-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Seaborne <>
Subject Re: SVN planning
Date Thu, 06 Jan 2011 18:19:55 GMT

On 06/01/11 17:20, Damian Steer wrote:
> On 06/01/11 14:11, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> Thinking ahead to the initial code import.
>> 1/ crypto audit:
>> Although it's after import in the guide, the text says do before
>> committing anything.
>> Someone to volunteer for this owning this?
> I'm still trying to digest the process...
>> 2/ Import:
>> The obvious thing for import to do is simply import exactly what's in SF
>> (CVS and SVN modules). However, and I'm certainly guilt of this, this
>> include development working files, not just the codebase itself. I think
>> we should import everything then cleanup, which can happen at different
>> paces in different modules.
> Are we importing the full history of jena into SVN?

Yes, I hope so.  if the tools can do it, then definitely, otherwise we 
might need to grab a tarball with history.  We really should grab the 
audit trail.

>> Jena uses a <root>/module/trunk style of SVN layout. Any reasons not to
>> continue with that layout? It makes [1] work on a module basis.
> That's the standard layout (you have /module/tags and /module/branches
> too?), which most tools seem to expect.

Yes. /module/{tags,branches,trunk}

Looking at other incubator projects, I see that some have gone for the
/trunk/module style (a majority? by a small sample I looked at) and 
that's how the Jena repo was initialized (not that it isn't changeable). 
  Was that's just a case of how it got set, or is that an advantage?

I've only worked with the <root>/module/trunk style so I don't really 
know what the pros and cons are.


> Damian

View raw message