[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: refactoring when using CVS

From: Noel Yap
Subject: Re: refactoring when using CVS
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 07:39:58 -0800 (PST)

--- Tom Plunket <address@hidden> wrote:
> Why do I get two of each of Noel's posts?  (Using

Sorry, when hitting "Reply All", info-cvs sometimes
comes up twice in the "To" field.  I'll be more

> I find CVS works well with the XP practices being
> called into
> question.

Yes, but you've also said you haven't had to
move/rename much.  That's where CVS falls short.

> > I don't think anyone is suggesting willy-nilly
> > refactoring.  But the fact remains that XP
> includes
> > constant refactoring.  This refactoring typically
> > includes renaming and moving of files.  CVS
> doesn't
> > support such a feature.  Therefore, CVS is not
> ideal
> > for XP.
> I haven't found myself renaming files much, quite
> honestly.  How
> does CVS deal with file deletions and additions? 

CVS handles removal and addition of files perfectly. 
It allows retrieval of any version of the file before
it was removed.

> That's the way
> I'd prefer to go over renaming anyway.

This is how many developers handle renaming under CVS.
 The problems with doing this are:
1. diffing different versions among the different
names of a file is cumbersome.
2. if the removed filename is reused, CVS makes no
differentiation between the new file and the old file,
allowing for easy diffing between the two (not a
horrendous problem) and making it cumbersome to find
when the old one died and the new one was born.


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]