[RFC] SVN repo reorganization

James Robertson jwrober at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Jul 6 09:57:54 PDT 2004


Kevin P. Fleming wrote:

> While I'm thankful for the SVN conversion that Jeremy did, I find that 
> the resulting repo structure is not to my liking, and not the best use 
> of Subversion. It's confusing to have branches and tags for multiple 
> subprojects in the same directory...
> 
> I'd like to reorganize the repo as follows:
> 
> ALFS
>   +---nALFS
>   |     +---nALFS
>   |     |    +---trunk
>   |     |    +---tags
>   |     |    +---branches
>   |     +---users_guide
>   |     |    +---trunk
>   |     |    +---tags
>   |     |    +---branches
>   |     +---hackers_guide
>   |          +---trunk
>   |          +---tags
>   |          +---branches
>   +---profiles
>   |     +---LFS
>   |     |    +---trunk
>   |     |    +---tags
>   |     |    +---branches
>   |     +---BLFS
>   |          +---trunk
>   |          +---tags
>   |          +---branches
>   +---docs
>   |     +---syntax_doc
>   |          +---trunk
>   |          +---tags
>   |          +---branches
>   +---DTD
>         +---trunk
>         +---tags
>         +---branches
> 
[snip]

My only comment is about the docs.  If you are going to put docs off of 
the root of ALFS for the syntax book, then why not off of the root of 
nALFS for the UG/HG, like this?

ALFS
   +---nALFS
   |     +---docs
   |          +---users_guide
   |          |    +---trunk
   |          |    +---tags
   |          |    +---branches
   |          +---hackers_guide
   |               +---trunk
   |               +---tags
   |               +---branches

That way of we add another doc to either place, we are ready to go and 
no more moves.  Other than that, it seems like a good idea.  We already 
discussed have the three docs have their own individual version numbers.

I have no pending commits as I am still reading the book to figure the 
package out.  Not too hard really.

James



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list