On 6 July 2015 at 19:16, Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > I think the content on disk should reflect what's in SCM.
Well yes, but that's not what I'm asking. I want to get agreement on the proposed layout. > However, > would it make sense to move to git instead of SVN instead of moving to > trunk subdir? One thing at a time please. Moving to Git would be a lot more work. > -- > Christopher L Tubbs II > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 2:11 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> The reporter.apache.org code on disk has diverged from the copy in SVN. >> There are several files that are not in SVN, and there a several >> differences from the ones that are. >> >> One approach to this might be to copy the current sources into SVN >> into a new folder. >> Then we can look at merging the current code and redeploying. >> >> I was thinking of using an SVN tag for the deployed source, but the >> SVN directory for reporter.a.o does not use tags/trunk. I could use a >> new directory name like >> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/reporter.apache.org-ondisk >> >> but this is not the normal way to use SVN, and might prove confusing later. >> >> So I would like to start by moving the current code under >> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/reporter.apache.org >> to >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/comdev/reporter.apache.org/trunk >> (i.e. drop it down a level) >> and then use tags/disk-2015-07-06 (or whatever) to record the current setup >> >> Note that the generated data files (*.json) don't need to be stored in SVN. >> >> Thoughts?
