From: troy d straszheim (troy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-18 09:56:39
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:05:49AM -0500, Rene Rivera wrote:
> troy d straszheim wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 11:04:33PM +0200, Henrik Sundberg wrote:
> >> Internals and non intuitive commit (and perhaps meta-meta-problems)?
> >> Are you satisfied with the use of externals overall?
> > Very. I wouldn't propose it otherwise.
> One disadvantage of externals, which you might not have run into yet, is
> that they become invalid when you rename a project. For example you have:
There are two ways to handle it. One, you put revision numbers in
with your externals, for instance here:
Or you can tag the release as a whole with a revision number as in
(note the extra properties at the bottom). In this second scheme, if
a project does move, you'll see that things are broken at checkout and
you'll have to specify that revision on the command line. Probably
the first is better.
> So either you've never renamed projects in your set up, or you have
> broken releases ;-)
Eh, no, not *necessarily*, but quite possibly. The further back you
go the more haphazard our release process was, so I bet you could find
something that is broken. These are physicists, not professionals.
Anyhow, you'll notice that your sandbox layout proposal helps a lot
with this, since tags are separate from branches/trunk.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk