Re: subversion repository structure

[Yoshinori K. Okuji]

On Monday 14 July 2008 14:37:45 Pavel Roskin wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-07-13 at 03:54 +0200, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Thank all of you for making effort on moving the version control system
> > to Subversion. I think this is a big improvement, and I like it.
> >
> > Now, I would like to talk about the structure. Currently, it looks like
> > this:
> >
> > trunk/
> >       grub/
> >       grub2/
> > tags/
> >       release*/
> > branches/
> >       prepare*/
> >
> > IMO, this is not very convenient. This means that, when we want to
> > create, say, version 1.99, we would tag both grub and grub2. This does
> > not sound good to me.
>
> If you look into any directory under tags or branches, is will have
> either grub or grub2.  So not everything needs to be "tagged" (there is
> no real tagging in Subversion, just copying).

Sure. My question is more related to human understanding.

> Anyway, the current layout is in disagreement with the standard
> Subversion practices.
>
> > So, I think that this would be more appropriate:
> >
> > grub/
> >       trunk/
> >       tags/
> >       branches/
> > grub2/
> >       trunk/
> >       tags/
> >       branches/
> >
> > Since grub and grub2 are totally different, it would be better to
> > segregate them completely this way.
> >
> > What is your opinion?
>
> I think grub should be a branch, e.g. grub-legacy.  It is our stable
> branch essentially.  Even if the code is different, the purpose is the
> same.

I don't agree on this. GRUB Legacy and GRUB 2 are developed fully 
independently (if any). If we follow your way, the repository would look like 
this:

branches/
  grub-legacy/
  prepare_0_97/
  prepare_0_98/
  prepare_1_98/
  prepare_1_99/
  ...

I feel that this has no logical structure. When we make a branch for GRUB 2, 
we put it under branches, when we modify the "trunk" of GRUB Legacy, we do 
under branches, when we make a branch for GRUB Legacy, we use branches...

Regards,
Okuji