Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > Right.
|
| We have quite a set of branches already... are they all actual anymore?
No. (That was a rhetorical Q right?)
| 5928 lasgoutt Jan 09 2003 BRANCH-1_2_X/
| 3897 lasgoutt Apr 04 2002 BRANCH_1_1_6/
| 10803 lasgoutt Feb 01 17:19 BRANCH_1_3_X/
| 4369 levon Jun 12 2002 BRANCH_GUII/
| 1760 leeming Mar 14 2001 BRANCH_MVC/
| 2284 leeming Jul 19 2001 BRANCH_NATBIB/
| 7240 poenitz Jul 04 2003 BRANCH_NOUPDATE/
| 1705 larsbj Mar 07 2001 BRANCH_new_insets/
| 9351 baum Dec 06 2004 BooktabBranch/
| 9297 abraunst Nov 24 2004 CoordBranch/
| 141 ? Sep 27 1999 LyX-Team/
| 178 larsbj Oct 07 1999 debugstream/
| 807 larsbj Jun 12 2000 dialogbase/
| 1337 lasgoutt Jan 15 2001 lyx-1_1_5/
| 194 larsbj Oct 13 1999 pathswitch/
| 691 rae Apr 26 2000 rae/
| 319 larsbj Nov 15 1999 runlatex/
| 158 larsbj Oct 01 1999 string-switch/
|
| Based on names, we see a mix of release branches, feature branches and
| one personal-name branch ;-)
On top level we should only have the active non-personal branches.
Personal branches should be moved to 'personal'¹ some appropriate
place. Obosolete branches shoudl be moved to 'obsolete'² (I don't
want to delete them, they would be so hard to find later then.)
One thing with subversion is that it is a lot easier to use branches,
and they are not slow as in cvs. I will at least create 5-8 branches
for myself. Stuff I work with, ideas, etc.
I also want to do some reorganization with the tags.
¹ Or propose abetter name please.
--
Lgb
