It's for an external site and is also using BroadVision, a dynamic content
package which restricts the developers from having a separate server for
testing. That and the issues I mention below.
Oh, the other option is Harvest from Computer Associates. Developers would
rather go without a CM system than use it for day to day stuff. I make my
boss put the things that I do into Harvest. :-)
Here's my plan now -- everyone is the same user. No muss, no fuss, no
individuality.
Actually a while back, the -d option that was mentioned worked great from
the command line, but with many insisting on a GUI, I guess it's WinCVS.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David H. Thornley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 10:29 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: Re: FW: Website development
>
>
>
>
> "Atkinson, Chip" wrote:
> > Thanks for the information. One thing that I've
> encountered is the need to
> > take very tiny steps with web development some times. Part
> of this is
> > because browsers aren't like compilers. Things like
> > <tr><td>blah blah blah</td><tr>
> > get rendered differently than
> > <tr>
> > <td>
> > blah blah blah
> > </td>
> > </tr>
> > Icky stuff like that means that if you wrote the entire
> page at once you may
> > end up having to re-do the entire thing after you see how
> it's rendered by
> > the browser.
> >
> This is getting off-topic, but how much control do you have over
> the people who are going to access this? If this is a purely
> internal web page, and you know everybody's going to use the
> same version of Netscape or Internet Explorer with pretty much
> the same settings, then it makes sense to consider the exact
> difference between the renderings of the above. Even then,
> odd stuff like that may change for the worse any time your
> company upgrades equipment or browser versions.
>
> If this is for external use, then people are going to use mostly
> Netscape and IE, but of all different versions and option
> settings. Some people will be using a different browser, such
> as Opera, iCab, WebTV, Lynx, old AOL, whatever, and you may wish to
> consider them.
>
> So, for external use, you can't possibly know how the reader's
> browser is going to render the HTML. It depends on browser,
> version, settings, window size, and possibly other thing. About
> the best you can do is write mostly standard HTML and look at it
> in a few setups and see that it looks reasonable in each.
>
> > I guess to summarize, I'd like to avoid having to force people to
> > drastically change the way that things are done in order to use CVS.
> >
> Understandable. It does sound as though CVS is a bad fit for
> what you're doing right now and how you're doing it. Whether
> this means using something else or changing the process is a
> judgment call.
>
> --
> David H. Thornley Software Engineer
> at CES International, Inc.: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or (763)-694-2556
> at home: (612)-623-0552 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
> http://www.visi.com/~thornley/david/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Info-cvs mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
>
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
