Re: crm versions in CVS

On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 01:11:07PM +1100, Jason Lewis wrote:
> It seems to me that the version control of crm is a little bit complex, 

no, it's rather simple indeed: currently there's no v.c.s.

> I'm not a source control expert but shouldn't all the versions of crm114 
> be in CVS and tagged appropriately so one could just get the tag required?

I'm (lazily) keeping ~synced people/paolo/wsy/ with mainline; I think you're
talking of 'branch' tagging, which was/is not the intended purpose of such
'wsy' branch.

But we have the triplet src/ tarballs/ diffs/ where you'd get via simple http
current mailnline src, *z*tarball of such, possibly of a few version older
ones, possibly binary versions of such, and diffs among release.

I've used to do that houskeeping manually myself, but it's not very 
efficient and a bit time consuming, hence I've provided/proposed a Makefile
patch for Bill to do just that as he's ready to upload to src/ (but seem
it didn't make it into mainline, nor it's ever been used :( ).

> And shouldn't each user's repository be a branch from trunk? I'm not 

Gerrit setup his repo, so you have some ancient stuff in cvsroot, and
some other old/ancient stuff along with 2 ~current branchs  under people/ .

> And also, maybe the crm code should be separate from the mailfilter and 
> mailreaver code? This would make managing installations easier for 
> admins I think.

Bill likes it that way, hence what you (w)get is that way; then your local
layout is entirely your responsibility.

> Just my two cents worth.

and my 0.01333 EUR (~0.02 US$ at current rate)

-- 
paolo


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/