[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: new repos: do we want an archive?

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: new repos: do we want an archive?
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 23:18:56 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 06:44:12PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 5:19 AM, Graham Percival<address@hidden> wrote:
> > However, I started wondering about all the old history that would
> > be lost when we delete web/ and (to a much lesser extent)
> > web-gop/.
> I don't understand this action.  In general the whole purpose of
> having a source code control system is to _have_ an archive old
> material.  Why do you want to delete old stuff, or move it into a
> different repo where nobody will be able to find it?

I'm hoping to avoid confusing new contributors -- if we don't use
the web/ branch, then there's a danger that somebody might start
working on files in there.  Basically, I *do* want to make it
harder for people to find stuff that they don't actually want to

However, I've discovered that git can rename branches, so we could
call them archive/web and archive/web-gop instead.  That should be
clear enough to avoid confusion.

- Graham

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]