James Strachan wrote: > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > One of the reasons for putting dynamically generated artifacts into > > CVS is that in the event of a recovery situation, CVS is on one > > server, and the web sites are on another, so recovery can be > > relatively quick. It is unreasonable to assume that the > > infrastructure team has the tools, expertise or time to use each > > different publishing engine.
> But the developers on the projects can easily do this for them? It > takes about 5 minutes to completely redeploy the website. You want to coordinate that for dozens of projects/sub-projects in real-time? :-) In any event, I was just giving a reason. Personally, I'd normally be on the side of not storing generated artifacts in CVS. Either way, it isn't my call. :-) --- Noel --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]