SJS wrote:
begin quoting David Brown as of Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 10:34:48AM -0700:
Or, get a [EMAIL PROTECTED] revision control system. Any comment, anywhere,
that
describes a change or it's purpose tells me that the revision control
system is broken. If other people don't have access to your revision
control system, get a distributed revision control system.
I've used version control in every place I've worked. It's always been
far faster if I can see the reason for the code change right in front of
me instead of using the version control system to study the differences.
It takes time to switch from the IDE or editor to the version control
system, lookup the change, study it, then switch back to the editor.
Often the changelog in the version control system (probably the same one
that's at the top of the source file) is not adequate either, especially
in code that's many years old, has gone through many changes, and has a
revision list as long as your arm.
I often find that after a couple of months, I no longer care what the code
was like "before".
With embedded systems, there's almost always a reason to care what the
code was like even years before. Often it's because a customer has one
of those older versions and needs support. Other times you find you want
a piece of code that performed a function that was removed, and now it's
needed again.
Why should PCs and other software be different? (I honestly can't think
of a good reason. Personally, I like to know the entire history of a
project and all revision levels from day one.)
PGA
--
Paul G. Allen, BSIT/SE
Owner, Sr. Engineer
Random Logic Consulting Services
www.randomlogic.com
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
