[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CVS bashing?

From: Mike Castle
Subject: Re: CVS bashing?
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 18:11:54 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.6i

On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 05:21:26PM -0700, Paul Sander wrote:
> - The modules database isn't versioned, which can affect reproducibility
>   requirements.

This same problem exists with Perforce and it's concepts of 'views' (think
each user has their own modules files).

What we do is, instead of managing views (or modules) is copy code from the
primary source into the heirarchy of the product, and then use it there.
It's made read-only, and any changes that need to get made are done in the
primary source tree only.  (Changes will be automatically propogated out
via use of triggers).  This process should work with CVS as well.

> - The *info files accept a comprehensive list of sources on their command
>   lines, limiting their scalability.  (After a branch merge on a very large
>   project, the command line buffer of the shell invoking the *info file
>   can overflow, causing breakage.)

I thought all of the *info files worked on subdirectory level only.  You
have enough files in a single directory to cause an overflow?  :->

This sounds like it could be somewhat easy to fix.  Do something xargish
inside of cvs to call them multiple times.

> - The history file grows without bound, and can't be managed in any natural
>   way.

A logrotate type of program can't work against history?

       Mike Castle       Life is like a clock:  You can work constantly
  address@hidden  and be right all the time, or not work at all and be right at least twice a day.  -- mrc
    We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan.  -- Watchmen

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]