[Pipet Devel] Development model proposal

Brad Chapman chapmanb at arches.uga.edu
Wed May 24 11:44:14 EDT 2000

Jean-Marc wrote:
> Now I'm not sure e-mails would be the right solution. The likely 
outcome is
> that
> it will generate enough trafic that noone will look at it.

I agree with you on this (even though I am the one who suggested 
e-mails :-). It probably will be too much noise.

> I suggest
> commiting
> small changes regularly and sending e-mails only when breaking source
> compatibility. I think with a little coordination and care, we can 
avoid most
> problems with little pain.

This is a very reasonible proposal and I'm all for it.

    I think what Jarl was worried about is making sure to always have 
the "most recent" cvs when working. For example, he could update and 
have me commit some changes 5 minutes later, and thus be working on 
the "old" stuff. I don't know if this will be a very big problem 

1. We aren't hacking too much on the "exact same" code at the same 
time, and if two of us working on the same thing, they will need to 
coordinate personally.

2. Cvs is very good at handling updates to changed code. If someone 
made changes to files you didn't change locally, cvs will just update 
your local files without a problem. If they did make changes to a file 
you change, cvs produces a pretty reasonibly diff in the code which is 
easy to edit manually.

3. We definately should be reporting major source changes on the list, 
as Jean-Marc suggested :-)

So, I'll put my vote in for no auto e-mails and more communication.


More information about the Pipet-Devel mailing list