From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-27 17:35:56
David Abrahams wrote:
> on Sat Aug 25 2007, "Darren Garvey"
> <lists.drrngrvy-AT-googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 25/08/07, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> *snip*
>>>
>>> /svn/boost/branches/libs/ system/ boost/ system/... libs/ system/
>>> build/... doc/... src/... test/...
>>>
>>> In other words, organized the sub-tree under
>>> /svn/boost/branches/libs/system exactly the same way the trunk is
>>> organized. That might be easier for others to understand. I also
>>> wonder if it has any advantages as far as various SVN operations
>>> go.
>>>
>>> Opinions?
>>
>> Since SVN copy operations are so cheap, wouldn't it be simpler to
>> have each branch as a complete copy of some stable tree, with some
>> isolated work stuck in? That way, a naive user (such as myself) can
>> just check out a branch - eg. the system branch - and have a
>> complete boost tree that they can test, use or develop with.
>>
>> As it stands, the 'branch' appears to be a subset of boost, whereas
>> I would have expected a complete 'fork' (albeit a temporary one).
>
> Yeah, a complete fork is what I would expect, and probably want.
That's OK with me, but SVN copy will have to be not just cheap, but
*very* cheap or disk usage will explode.
--Beman