[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: Branko ─îibej <brane_at_xbc.nu>
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2010 10:42:58 +0100

Mark Mielke wrote:
> The model is a bit easier to implement in ClearCase and GIT, since
> these are both effectively the working copy is a different stream from
> the parent whereas Subversion designer work flows tend to work
> directly on "trunk".

In both ClearCase and GIT (and more so in ClearCase) you pay for it by
requiring "someone" do constantly merge stuff to some "stable" mainline.
Moreover, the per-developer branch model is just one way of using
ClearCase and IMHO one of the more broken recommendations.

I once worked in a company where one of the teams used exactly that
approach and had constantly broken builds because one bit or another was
not properly merged from developer-specific branches to the mainline.
When I asked them why not use a little less granularity in their
branches, e.g., at least per-task or per-bugfix, not per-developer, the
response was that "then the developers would work more slowly because
they'd have to worry about other peoples' commits." QED.

(You can get the same effect by creating a branch for each developer in
Subversion. You can imagine the horror that integration then becomes.)

(And just FYI, ClearCase for example /does/ provide a mixed-revision
working copy model.)

-- Brane
Received on 2010-01-07 10:43:38 CET

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