Re: [tlug] Great Git resources -- thanks!

[Nguyen Vu Hung <vuhung16plus@example.com>]

On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@example.com> wrote:
> Nguyen Vu Hung writes:
>
>  > > What I disliked about CVS was how each file had a different
>  > > version.  Perhaps that was meant to give flexibility, but it
>  > > was awfully confusing.  Also didn't like the version numbers
>  > > with decimals.  So, SVN fixed my two biggest gripes.
>
>  > Sounds like the color of a bikeshed.
>
> Not really, IMHO.  The per-file versioning (I doubt you meant this,
> though),
I don't use perfile versioning and I think the concept of changset
introduced by svn is a informative for persons who scans the svn log.

I think of svn as a system to track the changes, by features for example,
for by files. That means, I think per-file versioning has less meaning.

Using svn with a project management system like redmine enables us
to link one-to-one or many-to-many between svn commits and tickets
(including issues, features, task, quesion-and-anwser) that is extremely
usefull when it comes to the need of change scanning/management.

FYI: Redmineでチケット駆動開発を実践する～チケットに分割して統治せよ
http://www.slideshare.net/akipii.oga/redmine-presentation-846109

> makes it hard to revert to a specific version-that-worked-
> for-you unless (a) it was tagged or
branching and tagging are just marking a specific revision is convenient.
However, I see "version r1666" and "version 1.3.2" (after tagging) are the same.

> (b) you have an exact date for
> when you last updated that workspace.
Scanning thousands of svn commit logs is a pain, I agree.
That's why we use tagging to mark important releases.



-- 
Best Regards,
Nguyen Hung Vu [aka: NVH] ( in Vietnamese: Nguyễn Vũ Hưng )
vuhung16plus{remove}@example.com , YIM: vuhung16 , Skype: vuhung16plus