How do you then get the code to your live servers? Do they auto-checkout as well? How do you trigger that? Treat me as if I have only spent a few days getting a CVS system slapped together. ;)
Eric Jensen
TJ Hunter wrote:
We've got it setup so that every developer does have a working copy on their workstation. We all run linux here, so it's not a problem to have everyone running apache/php/mysql.
Commit your changes and we have a cvs loginfo script that auto-checks them out on the dev server for all to see.
That way, if someone breaks something, it doesn't affect everyone right away. you still have your own working repository or your local machine.
-TJ
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:37:44 -0700, Eric Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We've also been looking into CVS or something like. But I am having a hard time even wrapping my head around it for a web development environment. For example, you can't just check out the code into your work folder and hack away since apache needs to feed it out if you want to test it. For self contained projects that each user can run their own instance of, it makes perfect sense. Right now I have it setup so the projects are always checked out into a development directory that apache does serve and when you complete the testing you just commit the files and then run a script that blasts it out to all the appropriate servers. Also changed up the permissions so all coders can work on these files. Which takes away the user tracking functionality of CVS.
You can really tell this is our first time with a CVS system. I am very interested in hearing about all the types of CVS-type systems out there and their pros and cons for a web environment. Or even just better ways to lay it out.
Eric Jensen
Roberto Mello wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:06:12PM -0700, Steve Meyers wrote:
We're looking into possibly moving to something besides CVS for our version control. One we are looking into is GNU Arch. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be as well documented, and it seems it might be a bit immature at this point. It does seem to have some cool features though. Is anyone here using it, and if so, what are your thoughts?
I wouldn't say immature. It needs polishing, UI, etc. but its design is the best I've seen so far of the open source batch. And it works well, very well.
subversion is a pile of hacks. It is made to work, but just enough so that people used to CVS can feel warm and cozy. It does very well at that, hence the number of old CVS front-ends that have been made to work with svn.
You might want to look at Bazaar, a version of GNU arch focused on improving arch's UI, usability and front-end-ability. It was created and maintained by the Canonical (Ubuntu) folks, and will remain as compatible as possible with regular gnu arch.
-Roberto
.===================================. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `==================================='
.===================================. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `==================================='
.===================================. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `==================================='
