Re: pear svntag - Tag naming

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 8:23 AM, Christian Weiske<cweiske@cweiske.de> wrote: > Hi Helgi, > > >> > We should use $package-$version as tag name in svn. This allows us to >> > host multiple packages in one package tree (i.e. package + subpackages, >> > or in the case of pearweb, multiple packages that are the in the same >> > module). >> > >> > >> > So for OpenDocument version 0.2.0, I created a tag in >> >> pear/packages/OpenDocument/tags/OpenDocument-0.2.0 >> >> I committed some hours ago the svn tag functionality to the pear >> installer and there I decided it was release-0.2.0 instead of the good >> old RELEASE_0_2_0 >> >> Now what I see wrong with your approach is that people know already >> it's OpenDocument so repeating it in the tags dir is a bit of a none >> sense, one could argue that it is "nicer" for svn:externals because >> you get the package name directly but then again you can define >> exactly the name an svn:externals goes into. >> >> A compromise would be do have it simply as 0.2.0 and skip >> $packagename- and release- > > How does your idea solve the "package + subpackage in one directory" problem? Doesn't but you have to consider that pearweb and others are fairly rare and cvstag does not deal with it, at all. It is just as dumb about it as svntag. I'm not a fan of making all my package tags folders look like: File-0.2.0 File-0.1.0 just because of 2 or 3 packages out there which behave like MDB2 and pearweb :-) I might be convinced in the end tho but for now if anyone has brighter ideas on this than cweiske and I then we are all ears. - Helgi