Matt, I like a good back-and-forth on a Friday. I think this is a subject worth talking about. Here's my take on the matter.
Source control is better for systems that truly have source. For example, if I'm working on a small module in a huge C++ application at some large outfit, I can check it out and work locally. The more sophisticated source and version control systems can even leave my small module unlocked, with the expectation that my changes will be blended in later. So we can see a huge, inescapable difference already. If I check out a module in Remedy -- let's say it's just a few filters -- I'm probably not able to work on it locally. I'm not able to develop and test on a system that's identical to the main trunk, except for my small changes. What I'm working on, almost certainly, is the same development server that everybody else is working on. The other people in my group are likely making changes to their chunks concurrently with me. Will their changes affect what I'm doing? Beats me. This difference is not an insignificant distinction. When you say "source control" to a person who's working on, say, a huge Java application project, he or she is thinking, at least subconsciously: 1. I have a well-defined area of code that I'm working on. 2. I can compile and test it locally without affecting anyone else. I can make a real mess of it, give up, wipe it out, and start over -- and none of my co-workers will even know. (Except when they hear me yell "Doh!" in my cubicle.) 3. When others make changes locally on their little bits, I'm not affected. 4. Only after my updates have been verified and thoroughly tested by others will my changes become part of the main trunk. 5. If my changes are deemed to be a little too wild but nonetheless interesting, they may be placed in a branch, with the hopes that they might be blended back into the trunk someday. All of the above features (and many more) are intrinsic to source control. Notice that I'm not even talking about how and when code gets put into production. That's a whole different issue. It's all about "controlling your source." We could approximate the above features in an AR System development environment, but it would be very expensive. Each developer would need his own AR Server, each identical to the current mainline trunk. After vetting the code changes, we would need to import the objects using Migrator. Then the whole bundle would need to be migrated to a staging server for more testing. And finally, once the whole system has passed its tests, we would migrate the changes to production. Sorry to get so long-winded. It's just that I can't help thinking when managers mandate source control and we Remedy developers say, "Yeah, we've got that" ...well, I think we're talking about different things. What they're really saying is they want total change control, the ultimate effect of which is the assurance that no code changes ever get into production without being thoroughly understood, tested, and certified. And if our updates wreak havoc, they want us to be able to roll out our changes immediately and restore the system to its pre-change state. If the above is true, then I submit that integrating Visual SourceSafe with the Admin Tool barely scratches the surface. You need to save definition dumps constantly during the day; you need continual system backups; and most of all you need Migrator. [Disclaimer: I'm not trying to sell anyone on Migrator. I've always had problems with it. I don't even enjoy using it. But in a large development environment, you need it or something like it. It's possible that Panacea is a better tool, but I have absolutely no experience with it. YMMV.] Tim Widowfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] v: 937-878-9045 f: 937-878-9055 m: 937-369-7012 http://www.widowfield.com ----- Original Message ---- From: Matthew White To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 6:59:02 AM Subject: Re: [ARSLIST] Remedy integration with CVS ** Tim, Without getting into a back and forth… In whole, source control is a good thing. In fact, if you do work in the financial, insurance or pharmaceutical companies it is mandated. While Remedy doesn’t play 100% nice with MS SourceControl the good points outway the bad points IMO. From what I am reading below (i.e., people on vacation) it sounds like a process issue more than anything. I am not sure who doesn’t like the idea of being able to look at the differences between code for a given object from one point to another to track down a root cause and/or potential bug. Moreover, I enjoy having the ability to rollback to a previous version of an object with a few clicks. Matt White White Consulting, Inc. 201.248.0438 From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Widowfield Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 10:40 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Remdy integration with CVS Or you could try the CVS proxy plug-in for SCC. (SCC is Microsoft's API/protocol for SourceSafe.) I've played with it on development AR servers, and it works OK. I've never tried it for extended periods or on production servers. Still, it's a nice little tool... http://www.pushok.com/soft_cvs_proxy.php On the whole I have an ambivalent attitude toward source control on ARS. It gives other development groups and managers (the PHBs) the mistaken impression that we actually have "source." In reality, we have the opposite of source code -- we're storing exported, rendered definition files. There is no AR preprocessor. There is no AR compiler. I will grant you that it's nice to be able to lock out code that's under construction. However, I've experienced two kinds of events in which SourceSafe really gets in the way of productive work. First, I've been stuck with AR objects that are checked out (locked) by people who left on vacation. That's a pain, but not a real killer. Second, I've been on projects where SourceSafe has crashed. There's a good reason why Microsoft's internal development teams don't use SourceSafe... It isn't reliable and it doesn't scale. At least this was the state of affairs throughout the late 90s and the early 00s. If SourceSafe has recently gotten more reliable and scalable, that's nice. (But I kinda doubt it... I mean, consider the "source.") Tim Widowfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] v: 937-878-9045 f: 937-878-9055 m: 937-369-7012 http://www.widowfield.com ----- Original Message ---- From: Matthew White To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 9:03:33 PM Subject: Re: [ARSLIST] Remdy integration with CVS ** Balaji, Good luck! ;) In short, you would have to export each object into a def file and Checkout/Commit via command line or IDE (i.e., WinCVS). This is a place where Remedy/BMC just falls short… Matt White Consulting, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Balaji Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 8:01 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Remdy integration with CVS ** Hello, I want to integrate remedy with CVS. Has any one does this integration before and can you pls share details as how to go about it. regards Balaji Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at http://www.wwrug.org
