From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,3c8a1ddc13ecb354 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "James A. Squire" Subject: Re: Configuration Management for Ada on Unix Date: 1996/06/03 Message-ID: <31B30DAD.5F@csehp3.mdc.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 158241973 sender: Ada programming language references: <9605301407.AA03821@most> comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: MDA Avionics Tools & Processes mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (X11; I; HP-UX A.09.01 9000/715) Date: 1996-06-03T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Jim Kingdon wrote: > > > My point is that there was no explicit mechanism for saying, "stick > > version I just checked in in baseline." > > In CVS, one way to do this would be with branches. One branch would > be the baseline, and non-baseline changes would happen on other > branches. It is a *big* step up from RCS or SCCS in this respect, > because of its ability to operate on an entire directory tree in one > operation. Well, right there in your description - you have to use make the word "branch" double as the word "baseline". It seems to me that the concept would break down, unless of course you can version control the directory itself. you can call it a baseline. But once I establish that the baseline is correct, it becomes frozen. I need to be able to retrieve it later, plus I need to get on with the latest version - which will mean changes right there in that same branch and directory. > Unfortunately, there is no standard terminology. From "Spectrum of > Functionality in Configuration Management Systems", CMU/SEI-90-TR-11, > http://www.sei.cmu.edu/~case/scm/tech_rep/TR11_90/1.4_TermClarification.html: > > As to what constitutes a CM system, there is no agreement. . . . But > it should be noted that existing CM systems provide their own > combination of functionality rather than a standard set. Thanks for the reference. I'll go check it out. I'm a little disappointed, I would have thought someone would have defined this better. However, I did not make up the distinction between CM and VC, I've seen it elsewhere. To me, one of the aspects of a CM product should be that one of the many objects it operates on is called "baseline" - and this should be a separate construct apart from branches or labels or whatever. It's cleaner and safer. -- James Squire MDA Avionics Tools & Processes ja_squire@csehp3.mdc.com Opinions expressed here are my own and NOT my company's "one of these days I'm going to better myself by going to Knight school" "You'll be a web knight instead of a web page!"