On Sun, 2007-07-01 at 03:14 +0400, Anton Korobeynikov
wrote:> Hello, Reid.
>
> > Fortunately, with SVN, making such a change isn't hard and its
tracked
> > in the commits. Anyone object or have other ideas in this realm?
> I'm also confused. At one hand, proposed layout (with BTT in the top)
> seems to be "unnatural", when we will create new tags/branches.
>
> In theory, each module can have its own version, thus if the want to
> "tag" it, we have either copy the whole repository to new tag,
wasting
> space and checkout times, or "tag" just a subset of the
repository,
> which seems to be pretty bad, because different tags can contain
> different "subsets". The same for branches, but not too
"bad", since
> branches are more or less temporary. Keeping BTT in the modules will
> surely make such problems thrown away.
Well, I think its actually less confusing and more amenable to doing
both module-specific tags as well as full-project tags. For example, we
could have:
/tags/llvm/release-21
to mark the 2.1 release of llvm. There really isn't any diference in
creating this tag as opposed to /llvm/tag/release_21. Same mechanisms
apply; the only difference is the initial path. We could also have:
/tags/llvm-project-release-10
which could be a tag for the entire project (all modules), something
we've never done before. Note that in svn, copies are cheap.
>
> At the other hand, keeping BTT inside modules can lead to headache, when
> some branch, for example, has dependencies on other modules (for
> example, some experimental version of CFE can be stick to some version
> of LLVM and so on)...
Right, my second example above addresses that.
Reid.
>