Re: Why does SCM have to be so ....... hard?
Re: Why does SCM have to be so ....... hard?
- Subject: Re: Why does SCM have to be so ....... hard?
- From: Christoffer Lerno <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 10:08:52 +0200
Hello Wade,
On Sep 19, 2004, at 03:11, Wade Tregaskis wrote:
Possibly, but looking at it it differently, let's say this mechanism
was for a local SCM which then could connect itself to the "real"
remote repository?
Are there any viable products which do this today? I know of one
person who wrote a bridge for connecting multiple CVS repositories (on
remote machines) - which worked to a point - but I'm not aware of such
functionality present natively even in the commercial offerings...
I guess my idea wasn't to try to do anything that fancy. All x-code
needs would be a system to save backups to all source-files and then
annotate those files with relevant data in some way. It doesn't need to
be driven by an external SCM (but it could be).
I don't quite see why the current implementation would have a zero
usefulness for you?
Well, it's a whole lot easier to simply duplicate my whole project
directory when I have a finished version than work with CVS etc. I
can just as easy run a diff on a whole directory.
Of course, if I would commit on a regular basis then it would be
useful, but since you have to do all these things manually I am a
whole lot less likely to actually get around to creating versions
regularly.
What you seem to be ignoring is the need for commit comments... what's
the point of having a thousand versions of a file if you can't
possibly find which one you want? And having to write a comment for
every file every time you save it seems very counter-productive, if
you save frequently as I (and I hope others) do.*
Granted, in the system you're looking for with your two-tier SCM you
could probably get away with no [or few] comments in your local
repository. But even though you could diff your latest against the
remote repository to remind yourself what changed, you may miss some
of the subtleties you've since forgotten.
I'm only discussing this from the view of a local repository, I don't
argue that this would be a choice for a multi-user SCM.
The interesting thing is that the computer can automatically annotate
the saves for you. Obviously all saves would have the date, but they
should also write which build(s) they are part of, as well as if they
when they are checked out and checked in. If there is a automatic
counter so that every local build has it's own build number which you
optionally can annotate, then navigating through versions is very
simple.
That way you could automatically revert one or several files to a local
build, an earlier check-out and so on. An interesting feature is to
allow instant browsing between these versions without need to actually
revert to them.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden