On 23.07.2017 07:54, Nathan Hartman wrote: > On Jul 22, 2017, at 10:19 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nka...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I can glance at it if I can find some cycles, no promises. I'm leery: >> much of Subversion's support that I've seen, and that I've sold >> Subversion migration work with myself, is that the singular repository >> can be used to force developers to commit their work daily, to gather >> some idea if they're actually working on their projects, and avoid >> them squirreling away their work without code review or consistency >> checks against the main development branch. Been there, done that with >> personnel keeping git branches on their personal laptops or personal >> VM's and being horrified with later merges or even with what I found >> out they were doing later. It's enormous fun when an employee says >> "I've already done that" but somehow has never published their code >> anywhere that other people can see the work. > That's a legitimate concern. It could be partly addressed by adding an > analytics feature. That's a buzzword and could generate some hype as a side > benefit. There are already plenty of "analytics" features in Subversion (like > blame) and perhaps what's needed is a python script that looks at the last > day, week, and month, and spits out a report on how much and how often each > user has contributed in those time frames.
And so on ... such tools do exist. But no amount of tooling can replace communication. If a team leader can't get info out of her team members, no version control system is going to make her any wiser. Or the project any less a monumental failure. -- Brane
