On 2004 Aug 24, at 15:33, m christensen wrote:
> I'm sorry, but the whole idea of multiple people working on a single
> tree is
> counter to the whole concept of change management and effective
> revision control
> IMHO...
It's exactly the philosophy both CVS and SVN are based on. If you want
lockout-based systems rather than conflict-pinpointing ones, you know
where to find them. As for me, having sweated far too much blood with
ClearCase with a previous employer, I'll take CVS (or better SVN) over
it any day.
> Ok, so it's checked in after the fact, that just means you are
> probably checking in
> in code which multiple persong have stepped all over each other on.
Commit early, commit often. I hardly every see conflicts even when the
change control system is heavily stressed, e.g. by a dozen hackers
banging on the same piece of opensource code at a coding sprint or
codefest (almost all of these use CVS, a few smart ones have moved to
SVN). On those rare occasions where a small subgroup wants to do some
extensive exploration and possibly major refactorings, hey, that's what
branching is for -- though merging the branch back into the trunk is
notoriously heavy going (because you're putting yourself in a situation
almost as bad as ClearCase &c routinely keep you;-), it's worth it in
these cases...
Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Aug 24 16:37:17 2004