On Tue 17 Jul 2007 at 07:09PM, Danek Duvall wrote:
> > This would mean it didn't back up in progress change (but would warn you
> > that it wasn't), and thus that you'd have to commit anything you'd want
> > to backup. I assume people do tend to have checked in what they intend
> > to back up anyway?
>
> I always thought it was a nice feature to have the g-files backed up as
> well, though I'm sure people can get used to it. On the other hand, once
> you've gone to the trouble of doing something special with the bundle,
> stuffing the output of hg diff somewhere alongside it probably wouldn't be
> all that onerous, either.
I think the main thing that 'wx backup' gives you is an easy thing
to tell people to do.
At Sun, in the kernel group, build machines are almost never backed up.
We've just never had the resources to do that. So, 'use wx backup' is
a common thing to tell people on build machines. And if you don't
remember to do 'wx backup', then sad for you if the build machine
explodes.
One nice thing of late is that (a) zfs is highly reliable and
(b) wx redelget and other operations tend to prompt you to make
backups. But I still make sure to do regular backups-- usually
when I redelget.
So I think it would make sense to take a look at the human factors
involved.
-dp
--
Daniel Price - Solaris Kernel Engineering - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - blogs.sun.com/dp
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
