On Mar 25, 2007, at 12:43 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Yoav Shapira wrote:
On 3/25/07, Mark Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Since tc6 is a single component, there is no need to provide such a
directory.
I wonder if we should still have current/tc6 for consistency.
-0. I can see the benefit of consistency but I don't like the idea
because:
- apart from offering consistency, it serves no useful purpose
- if someone tags the external by mistake the tag will be useless
The day that current-current becomes a stable-current (e.g. 6.0 gels,
and the next effort will become 6.1, 6.5, 7.0) - actually from the
day its released, doesn't it make sense to start directing maintainers
to the constant (tc6.0) tag so that current-current can progress?
Otherwise, if you wait from the point that 6.1, 7.0 actually begins,
instead of the timeframe 6.0 goes into stabilization, the change seems
to become exponentially more disruptive when it comes to pass :)
I'm afraid I can't tell what you are recommending from the above.
My experience with svn externals is that they look like they will be
really great but turn out to be a big pain in practice. Since
externals are no longer needed to reorganize the source tree how
about checking in a little notice into current/tc6+ indicating where
the source actually is.
thanks
david jencks
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
