[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 08:28:16 -0800 (PST) |
--- "Greg A. Woods" <address@hidden> wrote:
> Where it becomes bad is when it adversely impacts
> other members of a
> multi-person project. CVS provides ways to isolate
> such practices
> though so that they don't adversely impact the
> project (per developer
> branches).
Since bare-bones CVS pretty much forces you to tag (ie
branch) all files in the module, either it's a slug
when it comes to large code bases, or you're forced to
create a wrapper to manage branches for only parts of
the module.
Personally, I would opt for task branches over
developer branches since then, there'd be a very good
mapping between the branch and a change set and
multiple developers could work on the same branch.
Still, there's the problem of possible multiple
refactorings having to be merged.
> How do you know? An operating system is an awfully
> big project. Many
> parts of it can be worked on independently by small
> teams, and if those
> teams are broken up into pairs who do XP within the
> micro-project and
> then their "final" result is committed to the main
> repository then how
> is it that they are not doing XP? :-)
And how likely do you think a geographically disperse
team is doing paired programming. My guess is if the
team is large enough, there's bound to be a pair out
there doing this, but as a whole, I wouldn't say the
entire team is doing it. And if the entire team isn't
doing it, and they're using CVS, then it's irrelevant
to this discussion.
> What this proves is that XP need not have any direct
> interaction with
> the shared CVS repository used by a larger
> encompassing project.
So let's say that there is a pair out there doing XP.
How easy do you think it is to reintegrate their
refactoring changes in light of the fact that other
development has been going on?
> I'm hoping your misplaced sarcasm comes from the
> fact that you don't
> seem to have a clue about the current state of
> ongoing development of
> the *BSD projects......
I think you seem to think most real-world projects
reflect the same needs as that of *BSD. This leads me
to the question, when was the last time you've worked
in a corporate environment and how long did it last?
I don't mean this question to be insulting, it's just
that you have a completely different mind-set from
many other people on this list and I would like to
understand it better.
Noel
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
http://sports.yahoo.com
- RE: refactoring when using CVS, (continued)
- RE: refactoring when using CVS, Greg A. Woods, 2002/02/21
- RE: refactoring when using CVS, Noel Yap, 2002/02/21
- RE: refactoring when using CVS, Greg A. Woods, 2002/02/21
- RE: refactoring when using CVS, Noel Yap, 2002/02/22
- RE: refactoring when using CVS, Greg A. Woods, 2002/02/22
- RE: refactoring when using CVS, Noel Yap, 2002/02/22
- RE: refactoring when using CVS, Greg A. Woods, 2002/02/22
- RE: refactoring when using CVS, Noel Yap, 2002/02/23
- Message not available
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Tom Plunket, 2002/02/21
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Greg A. Woods, 2002/02/21
- Re: refactoring when using CVS,
Noel Yap <=
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Greg A. Woods, 2002/02/22
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Noel Yap, 2002/02/23
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Greg A. Woods, 2002/02/24
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Noel Yap, 2002/02/24
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Greg A. Woods, 2002/02/25
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Noel Yap, 2002/02/26
- Message not available
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Tom Plunket, 2002/02/21
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Kaz Kylheku, 2002/02/21
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Mark, 2002/02/22
- Re: refactoring when using CVS, Noel Yap, 2002/02/22