Hi, jkemp: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi, > > We are trying to install CVS on one of our server. Right now, it's up > and running and works pretty fine. It runs on a Linux box and we can > connect to it with WinCvs on our Win2000 workstations. > > The problem is simple : we do web developpement, which means the > latest version of the files should always be present on the server, > not only in the cvs repository. >
??? Do you really want last versions for all files no matter if they're buggy or simply they collide one against others I can't believe this. > Let me explain myself : > > Suppose we're working on a project with some PHP, I don't want to > install PHP on every programmer's workstations... I'd like them to > simply checkout their stuff...do their changes..commit it and than > check (via their web browser) on the server to see if it's right... > 1/ Why don't you want PHP to be installed on every desktop? I migth seem most work for sysadmins, but if correctly planned, it is less, no more, and have aditional advantages: simply develop a base-image for that desktops and reinstall those systems. The developer will gain better control about what he can/can't do, and better knowledge of the system they're working on, specially if their desktops can run the same OS than the server. I recently read an article about how java projects are downloading the quality of code. It went saying that, in the old days, programmers run their desktop OS as simmilar as possible to the production OS, so if they were developping for Solaris, they ended up with a Solaris workstation and the like, whil most java shops had their server running whatever Un*x flavour that fitted, but the workstations were mainly windows-based (because of the compile-once-run-everywhere buzzword). Under those circumnstances, developers didn't know a word about how the production OS worked, then failing in simple tasks OS-dependant (that nasty bug with that version of the JVM under that OS) or about peculiarities of the OS itsel (managing pathes, for instance). This come because I know about at least one shop (can you imagine which one?) that fails under this circumnstances too: They develop PHP code for Apache on Un*x, but they do development on their Win boxes, thus failing on understanding how Apache works (it's not needed they become brilliant webmasters, only the basic stuff), or how the underlying OS manages resources (again it is not needed for they to become gurus, just usual stuff). As expected, they tend to fail as soon as those kind of things appear (managing automatic emails, simply moving up and down some files -"what do you mean with that ../../?" "was it ./ or ../?" "Hmmm... repeat *that* again: so if I want this file to appear as http://my.server/virtual_dir/whatever.php, why in hell should I put it under ../basedir/includes/whatever.php? where ../basedir/virtual_dir/ is?"...) 2/ Your idea about serializing changes (yes: that's what you try, the last is the best) only works for simple tasks within short development teams (no more than 3/4 people). Once you go beyond this limits, you get nigthmares: "Hey, Bob, why database is stopped?" "-No, it isn't" "Well, my interface can access no more" "Ask Greg" "err... yes, you were rigth: he is playing with database access files, so I must stop my work till he becomes with a new functional version" or, "Hey, that menu entry gives a "document not found" error!" "That's coz Eva has finished his work with the menu, but Peter has not ended his underlying work yet" or "Hmmm... I have not the sligthest idea if my new docs are working properly because Ann still has not introduced the new menu entry to that part of the web"). Do you think my examples are stupid? They aren't. They become from the double fact I'm telling you: on one hand pure serializing is *bad*, on the other, as they work in Win, anything out from point-and-click provokes in them plain encephalogram. > What is the best way to do this ? Is there any way to ask CVS to copy > the changed file at the right place, and this, at each commit ? Since > we host sites both on Linux and Win2000, will cvs even be able to copy > the files over the network to another web server ? > Well, if you really want it, you can have that web server to be a checked out copy of the repo. On the Apache side, I know of a module (while I didn't test it) that will try for new updates on the TRUNK branch for a file each time it's accessed. Or you can try a cron job to do the update each 5minutes, 1minute or whatever fits. Provided there's connectivity, afaik you can have CVS client on Win2000 too for the same approach. -- SALUD, Jes�s *** [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
