That solution sounds reasonable. I misunderstood your problem. I though it
was abnormal release cycles, not abnormal CVS setup.

Eric

On 4/6/06, Mang Jun Lau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Eric Redmond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 04/06/2006 09:40:38 AM:
>
> >
> > I created an alternate repository named "TAG" (whatever your tag is) and
> > pointed apache to it. For example, if your corporate repo is
> > http://corp/repo1, then create another repository named
> > http://corp/repo1-TAG, and continuum can build only specific projects
> that
> > should be overridden. This repository was populated solely with a
> specific
> > tagged cut of the code. Then your team can depend upon the repositories
> of
> > both. When they point to Utility 1.0.0, they should pick it up from TAG.
>
> Isn't creating another repository too much overhead and a little overkill?
> Currently, we build the applications from RAD with the Utility project
> source.  If an application needs to rely on older Utility source, we
> simply check out a tagged version of it into the workspace.  Now, with
> Maven and Continuum, it gets a bit messy when you want to build your whole
> application together along with the Utility jars since we don't use Maven
> conventions with regards to CVS modules (i.e. each project is a separate
> module so the whole application has many CVS modules and not just one). To
> build properly using Continuum, I had to symlink all the modules into one
> so that Continuum can check it out properly.  So the problem is that I
> can't mix and match CVS tags in one build.
>
> > Now, in my defense, this strategy was employed to work on top of a very
> > legacy build/deploy system that knew only of SNAPSHOTs (and nothing
> else...
> > so its not really fair to even call it a versioning system). It sounds
> like
> > you guys have an equally goofy system. Are you guys supporting legacy
> > version in tandem? Meaning, do you branch 1.0 and continue working on
> it,
> > and then also work on 1.1? This was actually our big problem.
>
> We don't tend to do branching and we usually work off of HEAD.  When we
> release, we tag everything in our existing workspace and continue to work
> off HEAD for the next release.
>
> Right now, the solution for us may be to mix and match tags in the RAD
> workspace to your liking, then tag your entire workspace, then in
> Continuum, build from that tag.
>
>
> _Mang
>

Reply via email to