RE: AW: Multiple cvs users in one checkout area

[Greg A. Woods]

[ On Tuesday, October 22, 2002 at 09:18:52 (-0400), Zieg, Mark wrote: ]
> Subject: RE: AW: Multiple cvs users in one checkout area
>
> Likewise in defense of the poster's concept...I once worked a contract at an
> accounting firm in which:
> 
> (1) a single "sandbox" was ~150MB;
> (2) all work was "required" to be done on a single server with a 6GB drive
> (which was mostly full of Sybase data);
> (3) there were ~25 developers on the project.
> 
> Given the space and resource requirements, under the rules imposed From
> Above, multiple sandboxes just weren't an efficient solution.
> 
> Instead, what they came up with was a rather clever (and large -- ~80k)
> shell script which wrapped RCS and symlinked every non-locally-modified
> sandbox file to a common repository instance, and only replaced the symlinks
> with actual files when the user indicated an intent to edit one.

That's not a shared project.

That's a shared baseline.  No relationship at all to what the poster was
wishing to do with CVS.

(and I must say I agree that using a shared baseline is an entirely
valid way to manage shared resources, but it's not really compatible
with CVS, at least not unless you break things down into tiny modules
and then do the sharing of the bigger bulk of unmodified stuff with your
"build" system)

> Cumbersome, yes, and exactly the sort of thing which a properly-utilized CVS
> was designed to obviate.

I don't see why you'd say that -- it doesn't seem true to me.

>  But we don't all live in a perfect world, and
> sometimes must deal with impositions and requirements that deny elegant
> solution.

You'd be surprised how much easier things can be if you do "impose" an
elegant solution on your problems.  ;-)

-- 
                                                                Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;            <address@hidden>;           <address@hidden>
Planix, Inc. <address@hidden>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <address@hidden>