[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: CVS export

From: John Minnihan
Subject: Re: CVS export
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 20:34:13 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010628

address@hidden wrote:

[ On Thursday, October 18, 2001 at 11:49:52 (-0700), John Minnihan wrote: ]

Subject: Re: CVS export

building =//= releasing, especially when the build is already understood to be an 'overnite' which is at the very bottom of the food chain.

Of course not -- _BUT_ that's why I qualified my comments with questions
about why/why/how the nightly builds were to be used.

If they're actually used to obtain snapshots from which further testing
and perhaps even decisions about release milestones are made, then
having tags and using "cvs export" will be the better way to go.

Also, if your nightly builds are used to test your build and release
process itself then "cvs export" is just as necessary then as it will be
when you make the actual release.

Use of 'cvs export' to collect sources that are used to produce a build is almost never necessary.

On the contrary -- "cvs export" is the best way to guarantee that a
source release is exactly what should be in the release (and of course
one would want to build it to ensure that it's a viable release).

In all the years I've used CVS, I've institutionalized use of 'cvs export' only briefly at one client. And that was only to satisfy some nimrod (who didn't understand cvs) who screamed - repeatedly - "get rid of all these CVS files!". Presence - or absence - of the CVS admin structure hasn't had the slightest impact (positively or negatively on its own merit)on the success of failure of any of the thousands of releases I've produced. Period. 'cvs co' with a known tag is the way to go.

John Minnihan

reply via email to

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