Subject:
|
Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 May 2001 18:50:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4917 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Paul Gyugyi writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
> > I don't know if you saw earlier messages about the Part Tracker, but there
> > was some discussion about whether or not we could use CVS as a backend to
> > an automated system. What do you think?
>
> I'll go look up the discussion. I'm just getting back into the
> swing of things. I think CVS would be a great way of distributing
> the parts. There's clearly some managment tools needed to help
> with organizing the submissions and reviews of new parts. Some
> of this could be helped with CVS, but you would probably need
> a front-end program. If you go to www.sourceforge.com and
> search for "wincvs", you'll find the "The CvsGui project" with
> MFC C++ sourcecode for calling CVS and other things that will
> help tie CVS into a front-end. A popular front end, WinCVS,
> should be at http://www.wincvs.org, but that site seems down today.
>
> > There are a number of features we need that (I think) CVS does not offer
> > 'out of the box'. These are:
> >
> > 1. Unofficial/Official flag. When files are submitted, they are
> > unofficial. Once they're released, they're official. Or turn this around,
> > and once files are official (ie, certified), they're released.
>
>
> This could be managed with CVS branches. One branch, the unofficial,
> can be updated by anyone. The other, the official, is read-only.
> The LDRAW Overlord Government is responsible for approving parts,
> and moves them from one branch to the other. When you get files
> with CVS, it can insert comments in the files that say which
> branch the files came from.
>
> > 2. Certification process. After files are submitted, they need to be
> > peer-reviewed. After they're peer-reviewed and OK'ed, they can be
> > auto-included in the next update cycle.
>
>
> CVS lets you find out "what is new" in a repository. For instance,
> the command "cvs diff -rFEB2001_RELEASE *.dat" would show me all files
> that are different since the febuary 2001 release (I assuming I tagged
> the files with the FEB2001_RELEASE label at the time of the release).
> I'm afraid CVS doesn't give you any additional help in organizing
> peer-review, although I'll see if source-forge's bug tracking
> abilities can be of use.
>
>
> > 3. File-checking. When files are submitted, they should be auto-checked
> > for syntactic problems.
>
> You'll need a front-end for this.
I think a small script running "l3p -check" called from within the CVS
commitinfo file would work great for this.
>
> > A couple of issues with using CVS in development with the Parts Tracker
> > are: (remember, I've got no experience with CVS; some of these could be
> > ignorance)
> >
> > 1. NIH. Discount this one if you want. Or call it 'unfamiliarity with CVS
> > causes project to be more complicated rather than less'.
>
> I've been using CVS for a few years now. It is complicated, but only
> because the tasks involved are complicated. The big advantage is
> being able to find out what is new and what has changed
> (and who changed it).
>
>
> > 2. CVS gives us functionality that is nice to have, but not required for
> > the PT.
> >
> > STeve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
| (...) I'll go look up the discussion. I'm just getting back into the swing of things. I think CVS would be a great way of distributing the parts. There's clearly some managment tools needed to help with organizing the submissions and reviews of new (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
60 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
