Howdy --
Nice presentation, I've already swiped it down for display
on our intranet... :-)
But I'm going to make a little change to it, and I'm wondering
if it's a correct change, or a wrong change, or a just-a-matter-
of-opinion change, which is why I'm following up to the list.
When I used to have to explain to my co-workers what CVS was doing
and how to use it and whatnot, there would always be
a look of confusion when I got to branches and branching.
We've got some 7000 files in our source tree, about 155 modules
bluh bluh. When I start explaining branching of a single file
I'm wasting my time. We never branch a single file, we branch
the whole tree at once. so, a single file tree diagram showing
a branch would confuse people. How does that make a branch?
I started drawing branching like this:
MAINLINE------------------------------------------------------>
| |
| |
| |-V2_0--------------------------------->
| | |
| | |-V2R2---------->
| |
| |-V2R1----------------------->
|
|-V1_0---------------------------------------------->
|
|-V1R1------------------------------>
Where left to right is time. And the lines are not just a single
file, but and entire checked out source tree, all 155 modules
and 7000 files.
This drawing works for me because it shows that when the V1.0 branch
is made, all of the files are at the same point in time, ergo, are
exactly the same. For some reason, people hear "branch" and imagined
some magical transformation had taken place in all the files. And I
would point out that MAINLINE is always MAINLINE (which is what we
call it here), but when we make a V2.0 branch, it's not crazy to refer
to MAINLINE as V3.0, which it will become eventually...
Does this make sense to anyone else?
cheers
Rob
