Re: GRASP (was Re: This is a simple question)

[Simon Wright <simon.j.wright@amsjv.com>]

James Rogers <jimmaureenrogers@worldnet.att.net> writes:

> This might have revealed a limitation of the process you used.  I
> have found it both reasonable and helpful to document all changes in
> comments. Source code control systems may be able to identify many
> changes. They cannot identify the reasons for the changes. The
> changes should be a response to a documented requirement.

Some of this is so right, and some of it is so wrong!

One invaluable feature of a sccs (I use CVS) is that it can show you
_exactly_ what changed. Only after that need you check up as to why.

Suppose my potential coworker had accidentally changed a "+" to a "-"
somewhere in a 200-line file that he'd completely reformatted. My
chances of spotting that (his chances, come to that) would be close to
zero.

I completely agree that you need to document the reasons for change,
in the VC log works for me. The concept of "documented requirement"
seems just slightly foreign to that of "volunteer open-source
project", though!

-- 
Simon Wright                         Email: simon.j.wright@amsjv.com
Alenia Marconi Systems                     Voice: +44(0)23 9270 1778
Integrated Systems Division                  FAX: +44(0)23 9270 1800