Sounds like a good idea Paul, something I did not think of.
Danny
On 11/1/2017 4:37 AM, Paul Hammant wrote:
I'm also interested in standardized server-side handling of such
things for a different reason to the one you state - code reviews.
Well outside the purview of vanilla Subversion for sure, but a feature
that the portal vendors have or are coding themselves. I've a love of
Trunk-Based Development and got to see the code review system that
Google built for themselves around Perforce (Subversion was partially
inspired by Perforce back in 2000). Developers at their workstations
would declare 'done', and initiate code review. The changelist and
some metainfo would be zipped up and pulled to somewhere central. The
bulk of the workflow is in the UI Guido Van Rossum led at Google and
showcases in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMql3Di4Kgc (2006). Post
code review (and CI added metrics) the change-list could be
reconstituted and committed (submitted in Perforce lang). It is the
humble little save point that facilitates the 25,000 developers
co-existing in one trunk with Piper (their 2012 replacement to
Perforce) and ultimately bots integrating (Martin Fowler's preferred
language for merge to trunk/master/mainline when practicing CI) change
sets ever few seconds.
I'm much less interested in workflows where I'm sharing something by
that mechanism for others to work on, as that's not Trunk-Based
Development.
-ph
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
