Re: [SVN-MIGRATION] Argh!

Herman Radtke wrote:
>> She was saying that this is not how svn is usually organized, but
>> looking around I see other large projects doing that.
> 
> As a svn user, the current layout is intuitive to me..  However, the
> svn book discusses the KDE repository layout as a valid and common
> one.  It is just not the layout they recommend.  Link here:
> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.reposadmin.planning.html#svn.reposadmin.projects.chooselayout
> 
>> for $i in `svn ls http://svn.php.net/repository/pecl`; svn co $i/trunk
> 
> I am not sure why you would not want the branches.  If a branch is
> active, any change to trunk needs to be merged into the branch.  

That's simply not true.  Most of trunk (PHP 6) will never be merged into
PHP_5_3, for example.  Most of APC's trunk at this point will never be
merged into the APC_3_0 branch.  That doesn't mean those branches aren't
active.  They are actively maintained and bug fixes get committed there,
but all interesting development goes on in HEAD/trunk.  I will
predominantly be interested in trunk and I want a pecl directory
checkout that has all the trunk versions of all the pecl extensions
sitting right there.

> If a
> branch is inactive it should be removed via 'svn delete <branch>'.

Hell no.  This is revision control.  Nothing should ever be deleted. I
want to be able to go back and checkout and potentially fix any old
release, but that doesn't mean I want to see all 37 old branches for all
the various pecl extensions at all times.

With CVS this was trivial.  With SVN this is a pita.

-Rasmus