|
I’m
sure that this topic has been covered here before, so if someone wants to point
me to a transcript of this issue, feel free. Let
me preface, first, with the following comments. I understand that the loosely
coordinated, widely distributed development associated with open source
projects has a variety of demands that differ from internal, "closed"
development projects. My experience is primarily in the latter scenario. I
further this (possibly religious) discussion because I want to be enlightened
as to the value and advantage of the unreserved checkout scheme promoted by
CVS. And to see if those advantages are really appropriate for the closed
development projects. I
have worked in closed environments for a long time using reserved checkout
systems such as MKS, PVCS, and SourceSafe. In this environment, where many
people may be working on the same set of files, and often same file; where
there are common programming disciplines and guidelines, I have found the
reserved checkout scheme more reliable than merging. Merging, in my experience,
by developers of a variety of skill levels has allowed hard to find bugs to
creep in when conflicts are manually resolved or not detected. We
allow simultaneous modification of files, but this was the exception. And
branching projects allowed us to maintain older versions of projects while new
development continued along the main "trunk." Comments? Bill… |
|
|
