Switching from CVS to Subversion: test svn repo available

[Chris Shoemaker]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 04:59:18PM -0400, Josh Sled wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 04:45:47PM -0400, Chris Shoemaker wrote:
> 
> | Well, I think *all* development should be on branches.
> 
> Ick.  Now we have to fight about the benefits of Continuous Integration. :)

I can't tell if you're saying C.I. is good or bad.  I tend to lean
toward the disciplined side of software engineering, so I think
C.I. is _great_, but I know others who cringe at the thought.

IIUC, you're suggesting that developing on the branches means less
frequent integration.  I can see how this could happen, but not
necessarily.  In a well-working system, changes that are ready for
integration are merged into the "base" build ASAP, even daily.
Theoretically, the only thing left in the dev branches each night
could be stuff that is experimental, or in extreme flux.

In fact, I think that allowing development on branches allows
*earlier* and *more* frequent integration when compared to the
alternative: develope in isolation, outside of the SCM altogether.

So we agree, yes?  :)

-chris