>you could draw the tree like this:
>
> --branch
> /
> ---0.5 ---0.6 ---7.0 ---7.2 ---7.4 ---7.6
> / / / / / /
>--------------------------7.1--------7.3------7.5--------------7.7
>
>hence, devel could be seen as the trunk, from which stable releases are
>branched off.
Yes, but notice that the name of your "bottom line" changes, rather
than being "trunk" all the time. So it still is not compatible with
the svn convention.
>i'd just put all the branches (main and sub ones) into the same
>directory (whatever the name) and put the nonbranches somewhere else.
>and if you don't like the trunk convention then don't use it.
Mainly I just want the stuff in branches/ out of the way, since it
isn't relevant any more. The things I refer to as "branches" and you
refer to as "sub branches" are things that were worked on for a while
and then either merged back to one of the main lines, or discontinued.
This differs from the main development lines which are actively
supported, or at least represents the end result of such a support
period.
You have still not indicated which of the Pike directories you
consider "branches" and which you consider "nonbrances", or why you
want some of them hidden away with the no-longer-relevant stuff.
>what confused me is that there are branches in two places, and
>non-branches mixed with branches in Pike.
And I don't see that, because I consider everything in Pike/ to be
non-branches.
|
