Am Dienstag, den 07.06.2011, 08:13 -0500 schrieb Les Mikesell:
> Yes, I have a hard time visualizing how any tool can help with
> concurrent changes if one side doesn't stop while the merges happen
> both ways and the results get back.
Just look at Clearcase (again, sorry :) ). First, it has excellent merge
(tracking) capabilities. People can merge between branches in BOTH
directions as often as they like/need.
And secondly, it prohibits working on branches which don't belong to the
local replica. That means that users on other sites are forced to work
on branches, which are different from the branches being worked on at
the local site.
If you are used to working with branches, it doesn't matter anymore from
which site it comes.
> Some may be better at permitting the teams to keep working while the
> code diverges, but that's not necessarily a good thing.
Well, it is a good thing. That's the purpose of version control systems,
letting people keep working while the code diverges. Having different
replicas of the same repository is just "syntactic sugar".
Firma: Capgemini Deutschland GmbH
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Michael Schulte (Vorsitzender), Sven Breipohl, Burkhard Kehrbusch, Peter Laggner, Josef Ranner
Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 98814
This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is
intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to
read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message
in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message.
Received on 2011-06-07 15:45:00 CEST