Richard- Sunday, October 16, 2005, 12:40:59 PM, you wrote:
> One man's flow is another man's impedence. ;) LOL > For myself, I think Magic Carpet got it right for the sorts of workflows > I find myself involved in: it's stack-based rather than script- or > object-based, and in the projects I work in we usually assign owners by > stack and nothing more atomic. I think Magic Carpet is great. The serverless implementation makes it very easy to set up and use. What I'm interested in, though, is opening up a path to a more granular approach to rev development. If you don't need to get more atomic than one stack-one developer then you're home free. But if you've got complex projects and need to have developers check out an object from a stack, work on it, and check it back in, then nobody else can work on that stack without the pain of merging objects. In the stack-at-a-time approach only one person on the rev team would be able to work on the revLibrary stack at a time. That's a workable way to go about things, but it's restrictive on time and resource management and places an extra burden on the project manager. I think that for runrev to be accepted in "professional" environments it needs to shed the "cowboy coder" mentality that the rest of the developing world left behind a decade ago. Subversion integration in the IDE is a big step in that direction. -- -Mark Wieder [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
