[Buildbot-devel] Behavior expected from SVN master side source step

Tom Prince tom.prince at ualberta.net
Tue Apr 3 22:55:19 UTC 2012

On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 08:32:45 -0400, Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 1, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Dustin J. Mitchell wrote:
> For what it's worth, I usually end up including a custom
> split_file_branches() function for the change source that returns the
> text 'trunk' instead of None for the default branch, so I might not be
> seeing all of the potential problems that might arise from using
> WithProperties. Also, this means we have to explicitly specify
> 'branches/foo' instead of just 'foo' in the force build page for NUT -
> not sure how other people are handling that in their
> Subversion+Buildbot setup, but it Works For Me (tm).

For what it is worth, we are trying to deprecate the
None-is-default-branch behavior. I think representing branches as
'bracnhes/foo' is a sensible thing to do. I'm curious if when doing
that, if people actually have repositories that are structured anything
other thand <repo>/<branch>? The only other structure I have seen
suggested is <repo>/<branch>/<project>, but I don't know if there is any
signficant use of that.

If people are doing <repo>/<branch>/<project>, would it be reasonable to
use '<branch>/<project>' as the branch name, so having things like
'trunk/projectA' and 'trunk/projectB' as branch names. This would mean
we could always get the url to checkout by appending the branch to repo.



More information about the devel mailing list