Paul McNett wrote: > sheila miguez wrote: >> On 12/17/06, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Dec 17, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Paul McNett wrote: >>> >>>> Quick things, obvious things, or short things (IOW, easily >>>> reviewed) can >>>> just go directly to the trunk. >>>> >>>> This is how Ed and I have been working for almost 3 years. I don't see >>>> any problem with this scaling up to more and more active developers. >>> Well, at some point we may have to use a more librarian-like >>> approach. But that would not be for the foreseeable future. And those >>> are the sorts of problems that I would love to have! ;-) >> You guys are probably more well behaved than the last group I had to >> deal with who used a subversion repository; holy freaking cow one guy >> would do everything on the trunk and break everything for everyone >> else. >> >> and you couldn't complain because he was the president. drove me ape-poo >> insane. > > We like to think that common sense prevails around here, but > occasionally we'll break the trunk. A recent example is when I thought > it would be slam-dunk to support wxPython 2.7. I initially made all my > changes to the trunk but lo and behold it broke wxPython 2.6. So I > reverted my trunk changes, made a branch, and only merged back to the > trunk when wxPython 2.6 was fully supported again. > > I think subversion will scale well into dozens of active developers, but > if we ever get beyond that we may need something more distributed. Years > off, most likely... >
I am finding myself pushing the envelope. whatever that means. Here are the thoughts that go though my head: "this seems like a good idea, I wonder if it will work?" code code, test, fix. "hmm, it seems to work. I wonder if the rest of the gang will like it?" moment of reason.. "what if they don't?" moment passes... "I'll just commit it and see what happens." This has 2 implications: 1. maybe I shouldn't be committing so whilly nilly. 2. someone else may take the other path and not commit something useful. Given a goal is most amount of progress with the least effort, I think the "revert some of carl's hacks" is currently 'good enough" but I don't think it will 'scale' as well as you do. I have never had this level of access to something of this nature, and the 'responcibility' is a bit ..something. Personally, I would think each dev should get their own branch, and use some sort of buddy system to have changes reviewed before merged. or maybe some unit testing... I du no. that has it's pros and cons too. Carl K _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev
