[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Ignore local changes?

From: Todd Denniston
Subject: Re: Ignore local changes?
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 13:09:44 -0500

Wade Williams wrote:
> > Yes there is:  Do not ever modify the CVS controlled file!
> >
> > Always, and only ever, modify a copy of any file if you don't want CVS
> > to see your changes to it!
> >
> > I.e. this is a build system problem, not a CVS problem.
> >
> No, it's not a CVS problem.
> However, CVS could make life easier with this as an option.
> I can't imagine I'm the only developer that makes local changes to try
> something out, but wants to be sure those changes do not end up in the
> repository.
> The problem with "it's a build system problem" is that the files in
> question are not a part of any build system.  They're application
> configuration files.  So, that requires me to modify the original file,
> and then make sure the original is back in place before committing so
> my changes are not put into the repository.
> But, it sounds as if I'd be beating my head against the wall by arguing
> this one further.
> Wade

Actually, it may be a "build system problem".  If as a part of normal
development you need a config file that is different from the production config
file, you probably can and probably should setup a
script/Makefile/Magic_Incantation which can generate the appropriate config
file for development or production, and then version control that (instead of
the config file).

If on the other hand you are only varying the config file because you want to
try something out, well I have known plenty of engineers who do that, and
because it is something non-standard and probably only vaguely needed (i.e. no
one else is going to need the config that way) they deal with the fact that
they must do things by hand to keep their 'interesting config' from ending up
in version control.

if on the third hand (hey, where'd that come from?) each engineer needs their
own config that does not change often and it for some reason can not be tweaked
to the specific setup by a build script <probably_bad_suggestion>you could each
branch your version of the config file and not worry about the fact that it is
under version control</probably_bad_suggestion>.

I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb.  Thank you.
        -- Vance Petree, Virginia Power

reply via email to

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