RE: Merging in CVS

[Daniels, Dave F [PCS]]

>From my experience, technically the way CVS performs merges is fine. The
biggest problem has been misunderstanding of how to correctly perform a
merge, and this is a problem you can have with any tool. I've had instances
where someone complained that CVS screwed up a merge, but when I dug a
little deeper, it turned out the user had made the mistake, not the tool.

There are some holes in CVS (e.g., directory versioning), but overall it's a
very easy tool to use and manage, even with a large number of users.

Dave



> -----Original Message-----
> From: MacMunn, Robert [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 12:54 PM
> To: 'Thomas S. Urban'
> Cc: address@hidden
> Subject: RE: Merging in CVS
> 
> 
> We have 3 CM tools within the whole comapny.  CVS, Perforce, 
> and Clearcase.
> 
> Management wants to go with 1 tool.  They feel Clearcase is 
> too expensive,
> and it can be.  I am a Clearcase guy, but know the cost.  So, 
> Perforce seems
> limited, CVS seems to be able to handle all that we need.  I 
> just need to
> make sure that there aren't any gotcha's.  
> 
> From the feedback I am getting from other CVS users is that 
> CVS handles
> merges poorly.  I am not here to start an arguement on which 
> is the better
> CM tool.  I am not closed minded to think that because I know 
> Clearcase,
> that it is the best tool.  I am trying to find out where we may have
> problems with release engineering and developers.  The 
> graphical merge tool
> Clearacse has saves a lot of time, and it is part of 
> Clearcase.  The cost of
> Clearcase is just too astronomical now  and like I said CVS 
> seems to have
> all that we need.  I am just trying to figure out what we 
> gain and what we
> lose.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 'Thomas S. Urban' [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 1:39 PM
> To: MacMunn, Robert
> Cc: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: Merging in CVS
> 
> 
> So use Clearcase if it provides something you can't live without.  I'm
> only trying to point out that logically, the operations are the same
> (the timing may be a little different), e.g:
> 
>   1 You request an update of local file to newest version in 
> repository
>   2 CVS will merge new version and local changes (if any) 
> automatically,
>     (if possible)
>   3 If automatic merge is not possible, CVS forces user to *manually*
>     resolve conflicts
> 
> If you can show my how clearcase behaves differently than this
> *logically*, then maybe you've got a point (and maybe I'll start using
> clearcase since it would then have the ability to read my mind).
> 
> Everthing else is just interfaces and easy of use, both of which are
> qualities easy to remedy through toolsmithing, IMO.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 13:28:02 -0500, MacMunn, Robert sent 
> 3.0K bytes:
> > It isn't a slick interface. In Clearcase it is the merge 
> tool itself that
> > gives you the ability to deal with the conflicts easily.
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: 'Thomas S. Urban' [mailto:address@hidden
> > Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 1:27 PM
> > To: MacMunn, Robert
> > Cc: address@hidden
> > Subject: Re: Merging in CVS
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 13:17:12 -0500, MacMunn, Robert 
> sent 1.7K bytes:
> > > Not at all.  In Clearcase you have a graphical interface where the
> > conflicts
> > > can be taken care of as the merge happens.  No manual 
> editting of files.
> > 
> > A nice tool with a graphical interface is still a manual 
> tool.  It may
> > be easier to use than a simple text editor (but why would you use a
> > simple text editor?), but both process are manual versus 
> automatic.  
> > Perhaps the time the manual work happens is significant, I 
> don't know,
> > but it still happens.
> > 
> > Graphical interfaces for dealing with the conflict markers 
> CVS produces
> > probably exist, either with one of the many GUI clients, or 
> with emacs.
> > The vim plugin I use highlights them specially.  If I cared, I could
> > write easy vim functions that would take one version or the 
> other for
> > each conflict.  But it rarely comes up in our usage (i.e. 
> including good
> > communication), so I don't care all that much about slick 
> interfaces to
> > conflict resolution.
> > 
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Thomas S. Urban [mailto:address@hidden
> > > Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 1:16 PM
> > > To: MacMunn, Robert
> > > Cc: address@hidden
> > > Subject: Re: Merging in CVS
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 12:23:56 -0500, MacMunn, Robert 
> sent 0.9K bytes:
> > > > Thanks.  Looks like merges must be difficult in CVS.  A 
> lot of manual
> > > work.
> > > 
> > > Most of the time, merges happen automatically.  Manual 
> intervention is
> > > only required when they can't happen automatically. 
> Conflicts always
> > > take (some amount) of a manual work. Merges never do.  I 
> don't see how
> > > you can get around this fact in any system, short of exclusivity.
> > > 
> > > Looks like you may be confused by terminology. RTFM.
> > > 
> > > HTH
> > > Scott
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Kaz Kylheku [mailto:address@hidden
> > > > Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 12:18 PM
> > > > To: MacMunn, Robert
> > > > Cc: address@hidden
> > > > Subject: Re: Merging in CVS
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, MacMunn, Robert wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I am new to CVS.  I am testing out merging.
> > > > > 
> > > > > When I merged 2 files I got extra lines teling me 
> where the merged
> > lines
> > > > > where.
> > > > > Is there any way around this ?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ex.
> > > > > The <<<<<<< and >>>>>  delimit the merged lines.
> > > > 
> > > > No, they delimit conflicts. You can't get around 
> conflicts. You must
> > > > resolve them when they occur, and you can't prevent them from
> occuring,
> > > > unless people working independently magically stay out 
> of each other's
> > > > way.
> > > > 
> > > > RTFM!
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Info-cvs mailing list
> > > > address@hidden
> > > > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
> > 
> > -- 
> > Stupidity is its own reward.
> 
> -- 
> Building translators is good clean fun.
>               -- T. Cheatham
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Info-cvs mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
>