From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-23 16:11:38
Rene Rivera wrote:
> Beman Dawes wrote:
>> So after 1.35.0 ships, the tree would look like:
> Even though I prefer such top-down arrangements, that makes testing a
> bit harder. On each release we would need to update scripts and/or
> procedures to start testing 'svn/boost/branches/1_36_0' instead of
> 'svn/boost/branches/1_35_0'. Much easier would be to have
> 'svn/boost/branches/release'. The advantages:
> * Only one command for the release manager, an "svn copy" from
> "svn/branches/release" to "svn/tags/release/1_35_0".
> * No change to testing, and hence no interruption of testing.
> I don't see the problem with having multiple subdir with the same name,
> after all that's the point of such hierarchical namespace organization.
> Note, I'm only trying to find an arrangement that we can work with
> almost immediately per Beman's goal of getting a new release procedure
> going with minimal effort. We can always change it if we find it's less
> than ideal.
Argh... I completely forgot we were trying to keep the same name. But as
you point out, we can use the branches/release name but otherwise leave
the above scheme unchanged.
OK... I've updated the trac page at
I think we've now figured out where to put the bike shed for the 1.35.0
release. Let's move on to finalizing the rest of the 1.35.0 decisions.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk