[sf-lug] directory tree organization question

[Brian Morris]

How about

OLD-1, OLD-2, …

OLD-A, OLD-B, …

OLD-1-A, …, OLD-2-A,…

STICK-A, STICK-B, …

OLD-STICK, OLD-STICK-2, …

I use numbers for time-sequential-series, letters for edit-versions-choices

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 9:19 PM, jim <jim at systemateka.com> wrote:
>
> crikey, ken! that's a good thought, too!
>
> maybe i should do both? have a top-level
> OLD/ tree for some stuff and for other
> stuff have OLD subdirectories, kind of
> like the various bin/ and lib/ and other
> directories scattered around the system.
>
>
>
> On Mon, 2011-03-07 at 21:08 -0800, Ken Shaffer wrote:
>> I guess it depends upon how interrelated the subdirectories are.  I
>> tend to live off of 4G usb sticks, so they are too small to hold all
>> my files.  My usb hard disk holds copies of everything, and I move the
>> active subdirectories onto a 4G stick.  That means, I'd prefer the OLD
>> buried within the primary so I have everything related together, since
>> my primary subdirectories are not necessarily related.  Of couse, at
>> one point I went font crazy, and wound up putting the fonts on a
>> CDROM, with links to it from my font directories -- so I can see cases
>> where you'd want all the old stuff together.
>> _______________________________________________
>> sf-lug mailing list
>> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
>> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
>> Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sf-lug mailing list
> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
> Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/
>