Roman Rytov wrote:
> Actually I didn't practice SVN in the company but there are some of
> not-technical people here and I wouldn't like to let them even care
> about merge. They experience problems on much simplier level.
> What my group (as R&D people) needs is to somehow to recall to take the
> latest version from a repository. CVS or VSS both have "watch"-like
> functionality and closely integratable with almost all IDEs (that I'm
> sure SVN also can). So in these cases it's up to an IDE to remind to a
> developer to chek-out/in a file (actually it obliges her).
> I have to confess that I rather ask how to organize work then argue
> about it. I believe SVN in the current stage is workable also but I
> wanna underatand the whole workflow.
I think the reason you are getting argument is that the general
philosophy of CVS is not to lock files (even though it provides the
ability to do so) and the group of people on this list are those you
like CVS's philosophy enough to want to build a better CVS. We,
therefore, almost all believe concurrent workflow is more productive.
I also (I'll only speak for myself here though I believe it to be
general) am very accustomed to hearing people who haven't used
concurrent version control much make the exact arguments you are making.
Heck, I made the same arguments myself many years ago. But in every
case, once I've convinced someone to try it, they like it and don't go back.
It seems to me that forcing users to *always* know that they have to
lock files, and to *often* have to know how to deal with a file that is
already locked is more complex than having to know how to *occasionaly*
correct a conflict marker. Now obviously this depends on the type of
files you're storing and obviously it becomes a lot simpler to handle if
you have a good svn client that can walk you through it (I don't know if
any of the visual clients are far enough along to do so... haven't
looked at them much).
So anyway, I'm not going to try to convince you. And I'm totally
unaware of the level of support from the core developers for adding
locking, etc in the future, though I know it has been discussed before.
But I thought I could shed some light on why you are getting the
response you are.
It's like walking into a room full of Mac developers and asking them to
help you port OSX to an intel machine (yes, I know Apple has apparently
done this but won't release it) - sure, they think it's a good idea in
theory, but they'd rather just convince you to use a Mac. :)
Beta4 Productions (http://www.beta4.com)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Mon Dec 9 19:59:02 2002