Le lundi 12 novembre 2007 à 18:08 -0600, Les Mikesell a écrit : > > And when projects break up, or fold, the only part remaining (that can > > still be packaged years later) are the tarballs that were mirrored on > > code repository sites. > > Couldn't that be equally true of distributed SCMs? You don't need a full SCM history to build an app, just a snapshot so that's what would survive. Except unlike archives everyone would have his own snapshot and cross-checking them would be not easy. > > You usually need some time in a support/sysadmin position managing > > systems built by developers from SCM dumps (or god forbid production > > systems directly re-build from developer SCM-plugged RAD IDE > > environments) to appreciate the difference. > > I do know the difference - a company where I worked for years had one > group that was religious about deployment builds being based strictly on > tags and the SCM containing everything necessary for the build and > another that did a lot of hand tweaking and could only do the build on > one machine that nobody remembered how to reconstruct. A patient QA > dept. was the only thing that let the latter group survive. Then I'm surprised you assume we'd find mostly group1s on the internet and not a huge majority of group2s. > but the > best you'll probably do with internet development is to glue a bug > tracker to the revision number. Ie chances to get it to work given the breadth of software we package are slim to inexistent. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
