[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Making a file writeable

From: Bryon Lape
Subject: Re: Making a file writeable
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 11:21:03 GMT

Freedom?  What freedom?  Is it not source "control" or is it source "freedom"?
One is free to more easily and quickly lay waste to another's work, but that's
hardly an improvement.

CVS smells just like what it is, an acedemic exercize.  I've used all manner of
them over the years:  PostgreSQL, Harvest, glimpe, web-glimpse, GN/WN, Squid,; long before they were popular.  This is the first one to be
counterproductive.  When I can spend 3 minutes and seriously break merging, 
not productive and that's not an improvement.  Perhaps it should be renamed to
better reflect what it really does, "Quasi-Successful Source Merging Tool".

Btw, VSS sucks, with the exception being the ability to browse.  If the could 
the browse feature into CCC Harvest (not to be confused with the Harvest above),
that would be nice.

There is also an unfortunate mixing of common terms by CVS.  When a developer 
a "checkout" they are really doing an "update and make writeable" which is a
switch (unless they have WinCVS and which case the files may not be writeable).
Now add "update" before "commit" so changes, if any, can be merged, which will
more than likely fail.  Then spend time doing the merge by hand and having to
possibly to ahold of the programmer who made other changes to make sure 
is done correctly.  Now two programmers, at least, are being unproductive and
costs are going up.

James Knowles wrote:

> > In a sane and normal source control
> > system,
> Do you mean a "we can't figure out how to implement parallel development so
> we'll put a straightjacket on our customers and convince them that it's
> superior" source control system?
> > files stay read only until you check them out.
> Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad
> Oh how many times I've wanted to smack somebody up side the head for this.
> This is OK only in some development environments.
> > CVS seems to be
> > neither and lets people change files at will.  This is quite bad and counter
> > productive.
> Have you attempted to understand the theory of operation? I've spent a
> weekend giving myself a crash course in CVS. Yes, it's different than, say
> Visual Source Safe, but it's neither wrong, bad, nor counterproductive. I
> rather like it. Sadly it's freaking another developer out in a big way --
> and I have to deal with him.
> CVS requires a mental adjustment to client-oriented parallel development.
> The straightjacket is off.
> I guess it's like freedom. Freedom scares the living daylights out of people
> conditioned to living under tight controls.
> --
> Practice makes permanent. Perfect practice makes perfect.
> - Seville

reply via email to

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