I was just talking with one of my fellow developers about the project
she's working on, and how she's not sure subversion is capable of doing
what she needs it to. I've come up with two answers, which I'll detail
below; can anyone think of anything better?
The Problem: She needs to modify the files she's working on through a
tool that's only available for her Windows desktop, but she can only
test the modifications once they're on a Unix box. (They're a
proprietary binary format.)
Her current workflow is to FTP the file(s) she needs to her box, edit,
save with an increasing id number, ftp that file/files to the test
system, test, edit on her machine, ftp, test, etc., until she has a
working version.
Possible Solutions:
Create a branch, switch the testing system, switch her working copy,
make changes, commit to the branch, update the testing system, test,
make changes, commit, update, test, etc., and eventually merge back to
production. Downsides: the repository's revision number would take off,
she's doing two steps (commit & update) where before she did one (ftp),
and the repository would be full of non-working versions.
Or, checkout a working copy to her desktop, make changes, save with an
increasing id number, ftp to the testing system, test, make changes,
ftp, test, etc., and commit her working copy once she's got a good
version. I like this version better, though one thing I like about
subversion is that you don't need to use ftp anymore, which this process
wouldn't allow.
Anyone have any better ideas?
-David
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Nov 17 18:58:28 2005