[cvsnt] Re: Using modules to define "virtual modules"...

[Tony Hoyle]

Oliver Giesen wrote:
> SomeLib5 -d SomeLib/Src External/SomeLib/D5/Src
> SomeLib7 -d SomeLib/Src External/SomeLib/D7/Src
> 
> This is not possible with modules2 AFAICT or at least I wouldn't expect
> it to produce sensible results.

This would work fine with modules2

[Somelib5]
SomeLib/Src=External/SomeLib/D5/Src

[SomeLib7]
SomeLib/Src=External/SomeLib/D7/Src

There's no conflict at all there..

Modules2's advantage is it is completely transparent to the client... 
you can safely treat the directories within it as if they actually 
exist, instead of having to a different behavour from checkout and 
update as you do with modules.

All Modules actually all map to the same thing - there is no effective 
difference between an alias module with -d and an ampersand module, or 
even a 'classic' module, or even modules2 (unless you want multiple 
modules in the root directory, which won't work with a physical mapping 
for obvious reasons).  With few exceptions you can express any of them 
in terms of each other.

Tony