[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: CVS - setup reserved checkout

From: Paul Sander
Subject: RE: CVS - setup reserved checkout
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 12:06:09 -0700

>--- Forwarded mail from address@hidden

>3 developers (A,B,C) need to fix file X.

>A is making some major changes, adding lots of new functionality.
>B and C need to make a minor tweak to the file.

>In a CVS model:
>B anc C can be done and outa there in minutes and essentially forget about
>it. DONE.  They are moving onto bigger and better things. X does an update
>and B and C's code is meged in automagically and there are no regressions.

>In a lock while you work model.
>B and C need to wait for X to be done. This is very disruptive since B and C
>may need to work on somthing else big and their stuck waiting for X to
>finish or else they can change the code and potentially merge into X's code
>at some later time.

Alternatively, X, B, and C could create their own branches, and require
X to merge them when he's done.  This is usually this kind of issue is
resolved with a locking system.

>There are issues with both models.  Most people (including myself) feel that
>the issues relating to the CVS model are far fewer and less intrusive than
>the lock while you work model.

CVS makes people concentrate on different pieces of the puzzle.  By allowing
X, B, and C to share a branch, X is no longer required to remember to merge
the bug fix branches when he's done with his changes.

>I'm not saying you're wrong. However, I am saying I would find it very
>working with you on the same sources if you didn't choose CVS.

>There is a case where Greg would agree with you and that's in the case of
>binary files or files that can't be merged automagically - like jpegs or
>pngs.  I STILL like the CVS model since in many cases these kinds of
>conflicts happen with process problems and not versioning problems - but
>that is a rEAlly long discussion that we don't need to get into.

I doubt that Greg would agree; he'd recommend (in his way) that such files
be stored elsewhere.  But files like jpegs and pngs can be managed with
the concurrent paradigm if suitable merge tools are used.  It's just that
the one that CVS uses is not suitable for these types of files.

>--- End of forwarded message from address@hidden

reply via email to

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