I'd like to hear people's experiences with SVK; my impression of it (based on its CVS support) was that it seemed pretty flaky. If that is indeed the case I wouldn't want to inflict it on the students...
(To be honest, I'm leaning towards an SVN branch for our student projects in SpamAssassin.) --j. Andrus Adamchik writes: > Heh, that's actually a more general problem with team development, > both open source and commercial. I've seen people who would not > commit their local work to CVS for weeks or months to postpone > dealing with integration issues :-) > > So yes, communicating constant integration paradigm is important. And > providing the right tools is what makes it practical. > > Andrus > > On May 24, 2006, at 2:21 PM, Garrett Rooney wrote: > > > On 5/24/06, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> It looks like recommending SVK per Kevin's SVK suggestion is a good > >> idea - there won't be a need for the external repo, and it will > >> remove the reviewing bottleneck from the patch process. > > > > Just be sure that you don't end up with the student doing all their > > work locally and not showing it to anyone until it's done. That > > totally defeats the point of open development, peer review, etc. > > > > -garrett > >
