Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • I've used option 1 and ended up having a big rename to option 3. I ended up with a huge tags directory full of unrelated stuff, which was really irritating. Keeping the branches and tags for each module related was much more useful.
    • I agree, one should be able to rapidly find what one is looking for, and if I'm working on Module::One I would not be happy to look for its tags among those of Module::Two, etc.

      I usually go for the 2nd option, but mainly because I write few modules for very separated projects. One comment above points out that 3rd option can be useful to check out the complete bunch of stuff for one's group, that could be cool. OTOH, I'd still stick to a solution in which the module name comes before its variants:

      {alpha,beta,gamma}/{module1,module2,moduleN}/{trunk,tags,branches}
      So, it basically depends on what one is willing to call a "module", in the sense of a "unified and possibly coherent set of code to provide a given functionality", at whatever abstraction level and granularity one feels comfortable to think.

      If you prefer to think to the work of any group as a whole, then you have only one "module" (which you can ignore in the path specification) and your "modules" just fall back to become directories in which you're organising your work. So, IMHO it does not make sense to speak of:

      {alpha,beta,gamma}/{trunk,tags,branches}/{module1,module2,moduleN}
      but rather:

      {alpha,beta,gamma}/{trunk,tags,branches}/
      This is because the semantic I usually assign to "trunk" is that it represents the main trunk of that particular piece of work that I consider a project. Any subdirectory I create is only... a subdirectory, and does not enter in my way of thinking about the version control.

      If you prefer to consider each module as a unit (possibly assigned to some specific person in the work group), then you should probably go for solution #2, and put the module name before {trunk,tags,branches}.

      Just my (verbose) 2c.