RE: Personal CVS repository?

[Jim.Hyslop]

MKlinke wrote:
> In a simple single-authored project where she is trying to maintain a 
> much more fine grained control over her revisions that what the 
> "official" repository allows I'm not sure why she would even want to 
> "sync" the repositories?  It seems a simple comment in her personal 
> repository to the effect that "At this point in development the code 
> was released to the official repository" should suffice.
> 
> (By "snycing" I'm assuming you mean "make them identical in all 
> respects including cvs assigned revision levels" at some point in 
> time )  
> 
> Given the assumption above, why do you feel "syncing" is important 
> here?
Well, without any further input from Jill, we're both making assumptions
here. My assumption was that when she said:

> I'll be the only programmer on this
> project; moreover, my contribution will probably be pretty
> self-contained (i.e. I don't expect that anyone but me will be
> modifying the code that I write for this.)"

I assumed she meant she would be the only programmer *at her company*
working on the project, but there could be other people from the open-source
project, who might make changes.

If Jill is the only person working on the code in any capacity, then a CVS
repository is overkill. The local, fine-grained control might be more easily
achieved by making a tarball (or Windows equivalent) when appropriate.

But if she's not, then the whole issue becomes more complex - she will have
to manage both her changes, and make sure to integrate the changes from the
main repository. This is what I meant by keeping the two in sync.

-- 
Jim Hyslop
Senior Software Designer
Leitch Technology International Inc. (http://www.leitch.com)
Columnist, C/C++ Users Journal (http://www.cuj.com/experts)