Am Montag, 8. Januar 2007 19:08 schrieb Per Inge Mathisen: > On 1/8/07, Giel van Schijndel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A branch (in my opinion) servers another purpose, namely that you can > > change code more heavily (i.e rapidly). Without having to worry about > > preventing to break things (in fact a redo of the sound system *will*, > > at least in the first stages, break things). > > Nobody will worry if you break things locally... > > > Secondly it keeps the rest of the system in a more consistent state. > > No, this is where I am afraid you are wrong. Working with two > different branches make it more difficult to keep things consistent. > Consider two people A and B working on two different sets of code that > partially overlap. If they both work on the trunk, commits from the > one will gradually creep into the copy of the other and be integrated. > However, if they commit to separate branches, it is much easier for > their work to diverge radically, leading to code that will be very > hard to merge later, because their changes may be incompatible or go > in opposite directions. > > > Plus, merging in the differences from the main trunk from time to time > > really isn't that difficult. It merely is a simple `svn merge > > wz/[EMAIL PROTECTED] wz/[EMAIL PROTECTED] wz/branch/blabla` and then > > resolving all > > conflicts. ;-) Making it sound easy ain't I? > > Only until you've done it a few times... > > > I'm going to > > give it a go with C++ at first. I hope that when you stated this: "I do > > not want this unless there is a very good reason for it" you didn't mean > > you object me doing this maintenance and implementing? > > That is exactly what I meant. My experience from a far older free > software project is that one thing you should never assume is that the > person who writes some code will be around later to maintain it years > later, and one of the most important qualities free software code can > have is to be easily maintainable. > > Lastly, and I am sorry to put it like this, but just the fact that you > like C++ is not a good reason to introduce C++ code to Warzone. We > should have good technical reasons for changing stuff, even if we do > this for fun. I agree with Per... Not that I would have been distracted by C++ code, that is another discussion, if we want Warzone to be C++. But the main problem I see is maintainance, as it was proven a lot in the past that developers don't stay forever...
--Dennis
pgpk3TGEfAjBt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
