Subject Re: CVS
Author Reed F. M.
From: vince@... (Vince Duggan)
> Subject: Re: CVS
> Hi all,
> Let's assume for the moment, that NewCo does it right, and there is no
> reason to assume they won't.
> They will therefore have a system such as CVS, and everybody in the
> community who is involved will have access to this. Therefore there is
> no reason for the community to duplicate the work.
> What we should be doing with this discussion, is putting pressure on
> NewCo to choose the system we select as the most appropriate. We should
> _not_ be assuming that NewCo will do their own (incorrect)thing, and the
> community will be doing our own (correct) thing.
> If NewCo does it wrong, however....
IMHO, this is exactly the right approach to take. I firmly believe
that the people who go on to NewCO will do their best to make
it work for the community. After all, that's what their success or
failure will be based on. Obviously, there will be plenty of problems,
but given flexabilty and hard work on both sides it should work
out just fine. Just to throw more oil on the fire, I'll remind you
that there is NO one source control system for the linux kernel. Some
people keep their trees in source control, but development is done by
sending patches to the mailing list. It works pretty darn well. Not
to say that IB should follow the same model, but even open source
projects that do have a centrol source control have some limit to who
is given write access to the source control system. Typically, a person
who makes a fix but does not have a (for example) CVS login sends a
patch to the mailing list or someone who does have access. This ensures that
changes to the main tree are done someone who has demonstrated ability to
work with the code. If someone sends enough good patches,
then they are given a direct login. Remeber, even if a patch doesn't make it
into the main tree immediatly, that doesn't prevent anyone who finds
it useful from using it.

CVS seems to work quite well for a lot of projects. I would
stay away from strongly platform centric systems (MS source safe...)
or pricey commercial ones (ClearCase), since both will make it
harder for people to get involved.

In internet development, diff and patch are your friends ;-)
With these, it doesn't matter too much if different people
use different source control systems for their own work.

> Vince
> MIKE EDEN wrote:
> > [SNIP]
> > [It] is not clear to me how the IB
> > community source control efforts will interact with whatever Newco does. If
> > they use something different, than someone may be constantly having to merge
> > Newco's changes into the Community's repository - and that could be painful.
> > A tool will probably need to be developed to automate this.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Michael Eden

Get your own FREE Email account at... - Websites by the insane for the insane.