From: Stefan Seefeld (seefeld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-03 04:55:13
Robert Ramey wrote:
> If in the future, its necessary to make this even more elaborate
> that can be considered later.
I fully agree. things should be improved incrementally. You are totally
right, the suggested change is a big improvement. I was just afraid it
would be taken as an end-goal, not something that needs further refinement.
And, some comment on Doug's point about process vs. tools: I thing I find
rather disturbing is that, apparently, in quite a number of times checkins
mix different (and unrelated !) features, making it impossible to track
regressions back to changesets. (I remember one particular case where
it was impossible to roll back, due to this.)
So, along with setting up branches, we need a clear checkin policy.
Using subversion in combination with trac will certainly help enforcing
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk