On Thursday 17 July 2008 21:10:11 Pavel Roskin wrote: > On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 21:59 -0700, Colin D Bennett wrote: > > > If we're using branches, I suggest the following layout: > > > > > > branches > > > grub-legacy > > > trunk > > > tags > > > grub-0.97 > > > grub-1.96 > > > ... > > > > > > trunk is grub2, the current develop branch, and grub-legacy is under > > > branches. > > > > This layout makes perfect sense if we are treating GRUB legacy and GRUB > > 2 as the same project, but where GRUB 2 is now the development mainline > > and GRUB legacy is a past release codeline. > > > > On the other hand, if GRUB legacy and GRUB 2 are considered separate > > projects, then having completely separate sub-trees like: > > GRUB 2 and GRUB Legacy have consistent version numbering. They are > developed by the same people. They serve the same purpose. Users > checking out GRUB trunk don't expect to get GRUB Legacy. > > Let's take another project and look at it as outsiders to get some > perspective. Suppose gcc 5 is rewritten in Haskell. Do we expect it to > be in a separate repository?
Yes, I do, if it is so different. If something is rewritten from scratch, it is not continuous development but continual one. For example, just like libxml and libxml2. Regards, Okuji _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
