From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-26 10:46:42
on Sat Aug 25 2007, "Darren Garvey" <lists.drrngrvy-AT-googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 25/08/07, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> In other words, organized the sub-tree under
>> /svn/boost/branches/libs/system exactly the same way the trunk is
>> organized. That might be easier for others to understand. I also wonder
>> if it has any advantages as far as various SVN operations go.
> Since SVN copy operations are so cheap, wouldn't it be simpler to have each
> branch as a complete copy of some stable tree, with some isolated work stuck
> in? That way, a naive user (such as myself) can just check out a branch -
> eg. the system branch - and have a complete boost tree that they can test,
> use or develop with.
> As it stands, the 'branch' appears to be a subset of boost, whereas I would
> have expected a complete 'fork' (albeit a temporary one).
Yeah, a complete fork is what I would expect, and probably want.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com The Astoria Seminar ==> http://www.astoriaseminar.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk