On 13/03/16 22:03, Jim Starkey wrote: > Splitting the code base would strengthen the underlaying architecture, > spotlight unnecessary dependencies, and promote cleaner and better > inter-component interfaces. And, in theory at least, various components > could be released independently.
The fact that git does not handle modular projects at all well was my main objection to being forced to use it. CVS had it's faults, but also it's good points, and being able to create a release made from cherry picked parts of the code tree was one which was blown apart by the git requirement that every part has it's own repository. It's only recently that the idea that 'sub-modules' are perhaps useful to some projects that is concept has started to be developed, but essentially making each element of the code base a separate repo also requires that each is synced and track individually. Anybody remember the good old days when one could hit 'sync' and see which blocks of code had been updated ... one could then simply merge a block or individually scan the files of a block you were also working on. Not something that is easy to do with the current work flows forced on us by git? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Transform Data into Opportunity. Accelerate data analysis in your applications with Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library. Click to learn more. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785231&iu=/4140 Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
