svn commit: r224985 - projects/sbruno-xenplayground

[Ulrich Spörlein]

On Fri, 2011-08-19 at 11:31:17 -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday, August 19, 2011 8:35:23 am Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> > 
> > On Aug 19, 2011, at 11:51 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thursday, August 18, 2011 2:50:23 pm Doug Barton wrote:
> > >> On 08/18/2011 11:28, Ben Kaduk wrote:
> > >>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Sean Bruno<sbruno at freebsd.org>  wrote:
> > >>>> Author: sbruno
> > >>>> Date: Thu Aug 18 18:15:59 2011
> > >>>> New Revision: 224985
> > >>>> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/224985
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> Log:
> > >>>>  Pay no attention to this directory, in here madness waits.
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> Added:
> > >>>>     - copied from r224984, head/
> > >>>> Directory Properties:
> > >>>>  projects/sbruno-xenplayground/   (props changed)
> > >>> 
> > >>> Not that it's particularly worth caring, but projects/$user-foo seems
> > >>> like it might be a better fit in user/$user/foo ...
> > >> 
> > >> projects/ is for things that are likely'ish to be merged
> > >> user/ is for things that are related to FreeBSD, but not likely to be 
> > >> merged into src/
> > > 
> > > Err, are you sure?  The model in p4 that I tend to use is that
> > > user/$user/foo was for branches I will generally only use myself whereas 
> > > projects/foo was for shared branches where multiple people can collaborate.  
> > > Note that all of gabor's TRE stuff is in a user branch for example and that is 
> > > certainly a merge candidate.   I suspect Ben is more correct here.
> > 
> > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/ROADMAP.txt?annotate=221478
> > vs.
> > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/projects/GUIDELINES.txt?annotate=183722
> 
> Humm, well, more reason for me to just stick to p4 (though the main reason
> is that it actually works). :)
> 
> That aside, this branch doesn't sound like a definite merge candidate, or
> at least not something suitable for public consumption from the description.
> 
> However, I think user vs projects is mostly academic.  Both of them add bulk
> and public, forever history to the repo and making sure to only put stuff in
> the repo that is actually relevant is more important than the subdirectory
> it uses.

It's too late now, but it would have been nice, if projects/ was
reserved for stuff like portmaster or stress2, i.e. projects that are
*not* forks of head/. And stuff under user/ would always be a fork of
head/, created by "svn cp head/ user/something".

Or perhaps the other way round. Right now, there's no real difference
between user/ and projects/ and that makes conversions into VCSes that
do not use the svn/p4 model of "a branch is a copy in the namespace" a
bit more difficult.

Uli