--- "Thornley, David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Noel Yap [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > AFAIK, XP promotes "Refactor early, refactor > often." > > If so, and given Greg's premise that > refactorisation > > should be rare and well-thought-out, then CVS > isn't > > good for within an XP environment. > > > No, it doesn't mean that. It may mean that Greg > shouldn't > use XP, but then the XP originators were emphatic > that it > wasn't the right way to program for everybody. If > XP > basically requires shuffling files around, then it > really > won't work well with CVS. If it's a matter of > changing the > stuff within the files, it should work well. Just > commit > after each refactor.
Yes, I agree with you. I was just following Greg's premise to see where it would lead. Since I have worked briefly within an XP project using Java and CVS, I know it's possible and that refactorings didn't need a huge amount of forethought (although you would want to avoid bad refactorings). However, renamings and moves were still a pain that I think could've been alleviated with "cvs edit -c" specially if one could specify edit comments. Noel __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games http://sports.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
