RE: Storing generated files

[Brandon Brinkley]

> > I've heard convincing arguments from both sides on this one, but I
> consider
> > it good CM to control the built products for historical/audit purposes.
> 
> I assume you mean to store important "revisions" of the product files.

Yes.  Usually, the "important" ones end up as part of a baseline.

> If so, then yes, but such procedures used to do so should not involve
> CVS.  Indeed if you want to be really protective of your software
> process and to make it as hygienic as possible then those procedures
> _MUST_NOT_ involve the same tools used to store and manage changes to
> the source code that is the intput used to generate those product
> files.


If I didn't mention it in a previous thread, I'm relatively new to CVS.
Most of my experience is in CM Synergy (a.k.a. Continuus), which does
provide solid product management.  I'm still discovering what CVS can and
cannot do, because I am rather "protective" of our software process.  For
example, CM Synergy will prevent developer-built products from contaminating
clean work areas reserved for testing and release staging; CVS obviously has
no such mechanism.


> (as for storing and tracking the tools themselves, well when using CVS
> for the source code it makes more sense to use some other mechanism for
> the tools -- not CVS)

IMHO, tools (particularly third-party compilers, IDEs, and such) should be
stored on CD in a software library...not versioned in any VC tool.  That is
the line between consuming and producing software.