From: Sohail Somani (s.somani_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-14 15:25:49
On Thu, 2007-14-06 at 14:01 -0500, Rene Rivera wrote:
> Nicola Musatti wrote:
> > Hallo,
> > was a final decision taken on what should the repository structure be?
>
> No, AFAIK.
I was thinking this morning about how it could be structured given the
goal of independent library version releases + some stable set of code
that people can use to have all of the up-to-date released libraries.
So the up-to-date "trunk" which people can always svn co to get the
latest stable:
/trunk
/libs
/fusion =>
svn:externals svn://boostsvn/svn/fusion/trunk/libs/fusion
/thread =>
svn:externals svn://boostsvn/svn/threads/trunk/libs/thread
... etc ...
/boost
fusion/
include/
boost =>
svn:externals svn://boostsvn/svn/fusion/trunk/boost
I think the structure of the individual repositories could be discerned
from that. So if a user wants "latest up-to-date stuff" they do:
svn co /path/to/trunk
If a fusion developer wants to work on his library:
svn co /path/to/trunk
cd fusion
svn switch svn://boostsvn/svn/fusion/trunk/libs/fusion
cd ..
cd boost/fusion
svn switch svn://boostsvn/svn/fusion/trunk/boost
You would need minor changes to the Jamfiles to make this work.
To make a new release of his library, the developer would merge his
branch into trunk and notify the appropriate authorities.
I'm sure there are many things I have missed like regressions and stuff
but I think the basic idea should work. But it can still be totally
wrong and in fantasy land.
Sohail