Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
In message <address@hidden> on Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:17:52 -0700, "K. Richard Pixley" <address@hidden> said:
rich> Bruce Stephens wrote:
rich>
rich> >>Monotone has neither exclusive write-locks nor rigid access
rich> >>control. I'm concerned about the case where so many
rich> >>developers are committing, that the number of heads
rich> >>consistently rises. Even if developers are required to merge
rich> >>first, the number of heads continues to rise.
rich> >>
rich> >>
rich> >Is that likely to happen?
rich> >
rich> I think it's inevitable. It may not be common, but it will be
rich> inevitable.
To be honest, that's sounds like an undisciplined and uncooperative
environment.
Or just simply large.
People tend to run into problems before they solve them and scale is a
common boundary into which to run. Many groups will bump into it
before they agree to divide themselves up into some other social
structure.
I believe it's a bad habit to try to use the SCM as a
communication device (even though I sometimes try that myself),
Lol. I routinely describe SCM as a communications device.
and
very wrong to use it as a means to fight a war over one file.
I'm not thinking of a back and forth so much as motion forward.
Consider a GNU style ChangeLog, for instance. Every time anyone
changes any file, they also add lines to the changelog so that there's
some record of change for folks viewing the source tree from outside
the SCM system. Or a NEWS file. Or release notes.
I guess I see it as a social problem while you see it as a
technological problem...
Oh, no. I'm not seeing it exclusively as a technological
problem. I'm specifically looking for the outer bounds on the
technological solution. The question isn't so much technological vs
social, but more a question of when we will be forced to
abandon the technological solution in favor of a social one.
--rich
|