Thomas Beale wrote:
> You are really missing the point here. What I am talking about is not
> how "our" team works, it's more or less how CM is done. I am not of
> course saying that there are not variations or no flexibility, but in
> a mathematical sense, the relationship of mainline, alternate
> branches, release branches, and tags is relatively well-defined. Not
> everyone implements it the same way, but the intended logic is usually
> the same. There are many publications in the CM area which describe
> these concepts; all large organisations I have worked in have had the
> same requirements for this aspect of CM.
I agree in concept.
That said, I'll reiterate that Subversion is a version control tool, not
a CM tool. It has (most) of the features you need to build a CM system,
but it is not a CM system by itself.
Now, before somebody jumps up and starts telling us that "this is
missing from Subversion", I'll give you a hint: the above statement
holds fo 90% of the commercial "CM" tools.
For example, you don't get configuration management by buying ClearCase;
even its UCM features don't make it a "CM" tool. But you can certainly
build a CM process with ClearCase, just as you can with Subversion.
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Aug 1 17:05:57 2005