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

Re: VSS migration to...

From: Andrew Close <aclose_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2007-05-09 16:52:47 CEST

hi Jorg, thanks for the reply...

On 5/9/07, Jörg <styerk@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Andrew,

> One story from our history might interest you:
> About seven years ago, we had planned to introduce a large scale Configuration
> Management tool, because we thought this would become necessary in our growing
> company context.
> We had a look at some of them (including ClearCase, which we dismissed soon
> because it was simply to expensive with too much overhead for us).
> We decided to evaluate Continuus (now named 'Telelogic Synergy'), but by
> a mistake in our management we then bought it without first evaluating it;
> an expensive misunderstanding.
> Anyway, since we now had it, we tried to implement it and shortly spoking, although
> I spent nights to costumize it for our needs, it caused a medium sized mutiny
> in our development team and the result was that we soon stopped using it and switched
> back to VSS.
> The need of a large scale Configuration Management tool was soon replaced by implementing
> agile software development processes from Xtreme Programming and Scrum.
> The moral of this:
> What we soon had realised was that a large scale Configuration Management tool was
> just too much for us; we simply did not need it.
> It is important to differentiate between a Source Control tool and a Configuration Management tool,
> the latter being much more with some need to redefine the company's processes.
> In a company context with many highly interweaved development teams or a company
> with a huge amount of different software configurations that have to be managed,
> it may be useful to get a tool like ClearCase, but that is more than just switching
> the source code base.
> If your company just needs a new Source Control tool, ClearCase would be like
> buying a 20 ton truck for the daily shopping at the supermarket.
> In this case IMHO SVN is just the right thing.
> Although for the developers it definitely means an adjustment from the VSS-
> lock-modify-unlock- to the copy-modify-merge- paradigm of SVN.

i appreciate your insight.
we do need more than a tool; we need the whole process. but having
never used the ClearCase/UCM process i'm hesitant to 'accept' it as
the best way to go. my thought is that management thinks they can
save some time and pain by purchasing a process and forcing it on the
developers rather than taking a look at how development, testing,
deployment currently works (doesn't work) and coming up with a process
that is tool agnositic. my understanding of ClearCase/UCM is that it
will have to be modified to work for us anyway.

maybe i should also ask if anyone has a link to a process, or various
processes, that encompass development, testing, building, deployment
and the various tools that may be involved. i don't know that agile
or extreme programming or RUP are the processes i'm referring because
i don't think they specify how things get into and out of revision

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed May 9 16:53:09 2007

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.