Re: 'cvs add' client/server semantics (was Re: Triggers)

[Paul Sander]

On Feb 2, 2005, at 12:53 PM, address@hidden wrote:

> [ On Wednesday, February 2, 2005 at 03:35:48 (-0800), Paul Sander 
> wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: 'cvs add' client/server semantics (was Re: Triggers)
> >
> > Committing empty files may not be permitted by project policy.
>
> Straw man!
>
> (and a B.S. policy if I've ever seen one!)

Many shops seem to think that it's reasonable to allow users to commit 
code only after it has successfully compiled.  I happen to think it's a 
bogus policy, too, but then the shops that employ such policies have no 
appreciation of good change control and they think that this is a 
method that's "good enough".  Unfortunately, my experience has been 
that cussing at it doesn't make it go away.

> > No, I don't really want total control over all client operations.  But
> > I would like more opportunities for the server to say "no".
>
> "cvs add" (and "cvs rm") operations DO NOT EVER CONCERN THE SERVER.  
> Period.

Perhaps, but I want the option to ask it if it foresees any problems 
with my actions.  If you don't like it, don't use it.

--
Paul Sander       | "To do two things at once is to do neither"
address@hidden | Publilius Syrus, Roman philosopher, 100 B.C.