[Evolution] Suggested repository layout

[Margarita Manterola]

On 10/13/05, Loïc Minier <lool+alioth at via.ecp.fr> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 12, 2005, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> > The main problem of the current layout is that it does not allow to
> > build packages automatically with the current svn tools.  Would the
> > modification you suggest fix this?
>  I don't understand what prevents you from building packages with the
>  current layout.  I see that only the debian/ is stored, and that the
>  mergeWithUpstream property is set:

Uhm, ok.  Maybe it's because I read some old docs, or something, but
when I investigated svn-buildpackage it stated quite clearly that you
had to include upstream in the repository and that the layout of the
repository had to be different than the one we are using.

I took this as a true statement and didn't even try to use
svn-buildpackage, because I was convinced it wouldn't work.

>  My experience is that I never had to grab an old package version, every
>  time I wanted a diff, I asked for one via SVN diff.  When researching
>  things, I also use the web interface to SVN.
>
>  But it's only me, and I see nothing preventing having both
>  branches/tags/trunk and unstable/sarge/experimental dirs, except
>  sanity...  :)

Ok.  I agree to do some sort of change to the tree.  What would be
your suggested layout?

--
Besos,
Marga