[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Subversion in 2010

From: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 23:04:58 -0500

On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 21:26 -0500, Mark Mielke wrote:
> There is a race between the pull
> and push whereby somebody who pushes before I pull will cause my push to
> fail, but we generally consider this a good thing as it allows us to
> analyze the change and determine whether additional testing is required
> before we try to submit "pull and push" again.

I've certainly heard this argument before, and I think it makes sense
for some projects.

However, I've heard from some people that they work on projects where
they would never be able to get any work done (that is, they would never
be able to commit anything in a reasonable amount of time) if they
always had to pull before pushing and hope that no one else pushes in
the mean time. Those projects are simply too active to support a "pull,
test/analyze, and push" development model.

In some cases this is because "the project" has been defined to be
larger than it really needs to be. For instance, the ASF repository
would be pretty frustrating to use if always you had to be up to date
before committing, but it's easy to see how the ASF might have created
separate repositories for each project instead of what it did. In other
cases "the project" is not so easily subdivided.
Received on 2010-01-07 05:11:03 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.