Re: Crazy idea - replace RCS backend with ClearCase...!!!

[Julian Gosnell]

Donald,

I've explained this in the thread enclosed.

It's not my choice to sit between products that talk
CVS and a company that insists on using Clearcase and
I think what I have proposed is actually not a bad
idea.

It means that if my company takes on a new tool OR
!DEVELOPER! that knows only CVS, it/they can still be
immediately productive.

Now, before I look at this any further I really need
to know whether all interaction with versioned files
is indeed abstracted out of CVS and into the RCS
component, as has been implied, (in which case my
approach would work) or whether CVS also walks around
the side of RCS and messes with this stuff directly???

Can anyone give me an answer to this - I would really
appreciate it.

Jules

--- Donald Sharp <address@hidden> wrote: > Why not
just use clearcase??? 
> 
> What do you think you are actually gaining by doing
> this?
> 
> donald
> On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 01:03:37AM +0000, Julian
> Gosnell wrote:
> > OK,
> > 
> > That makes my life harder....
> > 
> > I reiterate the same question though:
> > 
> > Does this library represent the only interface
> between the data that it
> > encapsulates and the cvs binary ?
> > 
> > I guess I might now be looking at writing a
> library instead of some
> > scripts....
> > 
> > Thanks again,
> > 
> > 
> > Jules
> > 
> > 
> > Chris Cameron wrote:
> > 
> > > Sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but from
> 1.10, CVS incorporates RCS
> > > as a set of libraries and doesn't call the
> external rcs commands.
> > >
> > >
>
***************************************************************
> > > Chris Cameron                       Open
> Telecommunications Ltd
> > > Product Manager                           IN
> Product Management
> > > address@hidden                          
> P.O.Box 10-388
> > >       +64 4 495 8403 (DDI)                      
>    The Terrace
> > > fax:  +64 4 495 8419                            
>     Wellington
> > > cell: +64 21 650 680                            
>    New Zealand
> > > Life, don't talk to me about life ....(Marvin -
> HHGTTG)
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden Behalf Of
> > > Julian Gosnell
> > > Sent: Wednesday, 23 May 2001 10:43 a.m.
> > > To: address@hidden
> > > Subject: Crazy idea - replace RCS backend with
> ClearCase...!!!
> > >
> > > OK - I'm mad, now here me out....
> > >
> > > Imagine you work for a large company.
> > >
> > > They decide on a 'strategic' SCM - Clearcase -
> in which every project
> > > must live.
> > >
> > > They then task you with looking at OpenSource
> development methodologies
> > > and tools.
> > >
> > > Unsurprisingly, all of these use CVS - because
> it does the job and is
> > > free - in all senses of the word.
> > >
> > > I can look at forking each OpenSource project
> that I might like to
> > > deploy within my company (e.g. SourceForge,
> Tinderbox, Bonsai etc.),
> > > producing a Clearcase backend, and maybe merging
> (licences and project
> > > owners permitting) back my code, in the hope
> that it will continue to be
> > > maintained and I won't be left out on a branch,
> or I can consider
> > > something wierd :
> > >
> > > Tools using CVS for their SCM, ulimately as I
> understand it (I'm open to
> > > correction here), end up calling RCS. RCS has a
> nice small, closed set
> > > of functionality. I would be surprised if
> Clearcase could not replicate
> > > all of this... - So
> > >
> > > What is to stop me writing several wrapper
> scripts (e.g. ci, co, rcs
> > > etc...) which actually call clearcase to do the
> file-based version
> > > control ? This would be one piece of well
> defined work. Most well
> > > written CVS backends would continue to work
> oblivious to the fact that
> > > the implementation of the file versioning had
> changed. I would be happy
> > > since I could painlessly deploy OpenSource tools
> and work through CVS
> > > with them and my company would be happy because
> they would have all
> > > their source stuck into a repository which has
> cost them a small
> > > fortune.
> > >
> > > I guess what I'm asking is, "Is the interface
> between CVS and a project
> > > in it's Repository completely described by RCS",
> or does CVS do things
> > > like go under the covers and parse the contents
> of RCS files ?
> > >
> > > What would the gotchas be ?
> > >
> > > Do you still think I'm crazy ?
> > >
> > > BTW - I work on two OpenSource projects using
> CVS in my own time, and
> > > try to advocate use of and contributing to
> OpenSource and FreeSoftware
> > > in my company, so if you fancy flaming me for
> wanting to rip-off
> > > everyone's hard work and put it to my own
> capitalistic ends, please
> > > think again.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your time,
> > >
> > > Jules
> > >
> > >
>
_________________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Get your free @yahoo.com address at
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Info-cvs mailing list
> > > address@hidden
> > > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
> > 
> > 
> >
>
_________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.com address at
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Info-cvs mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs


____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie