On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 18:11 -0400, tedd wrote: > At 2:21 PM -0700 9/21/06, Chris W. Parker wrote: > >Hello, > > > >This is off topic but I wanted to get the list member's opinions on the > >subject as it will probably benefit someone else. > > > >-snip- > > > >Is this a sound strategy or should I just realize that I can't publish > >until all current features enhancements are completed? > > > > > >Thanks, > >Chris. > > Chris: > > I've been thinking about this as well. Please forgive my naiveness if > the gang already has a better way, but the method I used to do > application development was that I started with a folder that > contained all my code, which I named v1.0. > > Whenever I reached a milestone of some type I thought significant, I > duplicated the entire working folder; renamed the duplicate the next > version (i.e., v1.01); and started working with the new folder. If I > screwed up, then I could always trash the new folder, duplicate the > previous version and start again. It was a system that worked for me. > > At the end of the development cycle, I would have a long thread of > development versions. Often, I found that intermediate folders > provided branches for other development -- so, keeping intermediate > development versions was a plus. > > Now, it's a bit different working with folders on the web because you > have one "root" (live) folder and making changes can be problematic. > However, there's enough similarity that I often follow the same > method as I used in application development. > > For example, my current site http://sperling.com is alive and running > well. However, I am doing a complete rewrite of the site. As such I > duplicated the entire site and placed it in another directory, > namely: http://sperling.com/a -- and I work on that. > > When I feel that revision is ready, I will save the current "root" > directory to my desktop, delete it on my server and then pull > everything out of my "a" directory and make it the new root. For me, > that would take just a few minutes. For more complex sites, where the > change must be instant, I would look into using the .htaccess file to > change the root index. > > If there are better development schemes, I would like to hear about > them as well. Use CVS or SubVersion already. I'm not familiar with SubVersion, though from what I hear it's has all the features of CVS. At any rate, you create you directory, and files and stuff, add them all to the repository. If you want a snapshot just tag the repository with a name. This will create what you call "directory versions". At any time you can check out the repository for a given tag, or revert a file to a given revision, or just view changes between revision X and Y or X and Z (skipping Y). Get in the habit of commiting your stuff often at any given sub-milestone where you haven't broken the code. Then if you screw up, you can retrieve any single file's revision and backup only as much as you need. CVS also supports branching though I'm less familiar with it. Seriously though... you have what? 4 or 5 directory clones on the go? I can get any version of any file anywhere through 1 to 1 million versions. You can also check out files according to date so that you have a snapshot representative of a point in time. Cheers, Rob. -- .------------------------------------------------------------. | InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com | :------------------------------------------------------------: | An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting | | a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services | | such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn | | also provides an extremely flexible architecture for | | creating re-usable components quickly and easily. | `------------------------------------------------------------' -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
