[cvsnt] Betr.: CVSNT to CVS

Andreas Krey a.krey at gmx.de
Thu Apr 9 13:25:54 BST 2009

On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 10:00:59 +0000, Tony Hoyle wrote:
> A valid and not uncommon model is to keep the resultant binaries in the 
> tree for each released version.

Someone misunderstood '*source* code control system'. And, since by
definition those thingies (released binaries or installers) never change
there isn't really a point to put them under version control.

Let alone in the same repository. Also projects that do this are
usually not those you can easily contribute to, if at all.

> There's stuff that people never do, except in rare exceptions.  You'd be 
> surprised - we've had stuff break in cvsnt and it been 18 months before 
> anyone actually noticed.

That's not a real surprise. Weird corner cases are hard to even notice.

> Not so much.. create a branch, setup access control so only that user 
> can write to it. 5 minutes max.

That is still very much more than the five seconds for 'git checkout -b mine'.
The remaining work is spread out to later, when you are somewhat sure it
is worth it. In a way the local git repository is an extended sandbox;
you can start branches just like regular work without anyone immediately
noticing. It's not just the work but also that you don't immediately
appear in the global branch name space.


More information about the cvsnt mailing list