Re: Keep separate checkouts up to date

On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 8:07 PM, John Leonard <jleonard2012_at_gmx.com> wrote:

> first, commit each one then update each one?
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, normally these events are not strictly synchronized. Commit when
>> you
>> are sure a set of changes are in a state you want to save, and update when
>> you are ready to pick up the changes from others. But the longer you
>> delay, the more likely it becomes to have conflicting changes.
>>
>> What is a good way to keep multiple checkouts up to date? Would it be to
>
> So one strategy would be, say, to perform an update at the beginning of a
> workday at each workstation and then commit at the end of work?
>
>
It really depends on how the changes relate to each other. With source
code you might want to do a test compile to make sure a set of changes
don't break things before the commit. And if one set of changes can take
advantage of another or are likely to have conflicting duplicate changes,
you might do it more often.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell_at_gmail.com