Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-31 00:41:55


on Wed May 30 2007, Stefan Seefeld <seefeld-AT-sympatico.ca> wrote:

> Rene Rivera wrote:
>> Ping... Any comments on this? It would be nice if people voice some
>> comments on this subject now. Instead of later when we would have to
>> move a bunch of directories around.
>
> Yes, this looks reasonable to me.
>
>> [boost-svn]
>> boost
>> stable (full boost tree here)
>> devel (full boost tree here)
>> branches
>> my_branch (full boost tree here)
>> cmake_a (full boost tree here)
>> cmake_b (full boost tree here)
>> tags
>> boost_1_33_1 (full boost tree here)
>> boost_1_34_0 (full boost tree here)
>> sandbox
>> devel
>> xml (partial boost tree here)
>> explore (partial boost tree here)
>> branches
>> xml_b0 (partial boost tree here)
>> explore_b0 (partial boost tree here)
>> tags
>> xml_for_review (partial boost tree here)
>> explore_for_review (partial boost tree here)
>
> I'm still not convinced that the branching in the sandbox
> should happen outside the projects (as opposed to let each
> sandbox project organize its own substructure), but I don't
> have a strong opinion there.

I agree with Stefan. And that goes for the non-sandbox areas too.
What is the point of pushing **library-specific** branches and tags up
to the top level?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk