> I mean I understand the theory, I love it for windows apps, but
> I just cant see the deal with web apps.
The idea is that you release a web application with a specific set of
features. You (and presumably others in your company, or perhaps
clients) decide on a new set of features. That set of features gets a
version number, and the development process begins. Your team starts
implementing features, checking in changes as they reach milestones
(CVS allows developers to work on files simultaneously and
automatically merges most changes), and eventually the code goes into
QA. Once QA has signed off on the new version, the source tree is
"tagged" with the new version number (allowing you to roll back to that
exact point at any time, if necessary), and the new code is installed
(typically on staging, then on production at some ridiculous hour of
the morning). It's also possible to branch off the main source tree to
isolate certain features and changes, which is great for experimental
work, and the branch can later be merged onto the trunk.
Personally, I can't imagine developing without CVS. If you want a
simplified form of version control for a single user, consider RCS.
It's CVS without the concurrency.
Christian
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
