> On Apr 23, 2013, at 15:56, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Ryan Schmidt wrote on Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 01:45:49 -0500:
> >> 3. If you want the actual source code in the repository to contain
> >> these comments, then you're talking about several scripts: one that
> >> the developers must invoke in place of "svn commit" to commit their
> >> work, which transforms their files in the ways you desire before
> >> committing them, and another that runs as a pre-commit hook and
> >> verifies that the incoming commit conforms to these requirements (and
> >> rejects the commit if not).
> >
> > Or, more simply, developers run 'commit' normally and a post-commit
> > hook appends the blame-comments.
>
> Appends the blame-comments to what? Certainly not to the file in the
> repository because by post-commit time the commit is already finalized. And
> you wouldn't want to modify the transaction in the pre-commit hook because
> that would screw up working copies. Are you suggesting the server should make
> a second commit after every commit to add the blame-comments? That would
> totally mess up normal use of "svn blame", among the other usual problems.
>
I agree. It seems to me that a CI build process should be generating BLAME audit documents for the auditors that could be checked into another repository. The devs should OWN the source, not the auditors!
BOb
Received on 2013-04-24 16:16:51 CEST