> I'm part of a small development team (currently 4). We have two
> applications used in-house that consist of about 1900 source files. The two
> applications share about 1880 of the files in common, and there are only
> about 20 different between them.
>
> For a lot of complicated reasons I won'
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:35 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> On 1/2/14, 7:16 PM, James Hanley wrote:
> > I've used the Rev keyword in some of our code, and we noticed that there
> may be
> > a use case gap for the Rev/Revision and possibly Id keyword.
> >
> > As expected the keyword gets updated with any
On 03.01.2014 17:59, James Hanley wrote:
> Can you expand on this - I am missing where the preceding differences
> would be an issue. From what I can see, if there is a delta, it is
> either the result of direct modification or a merge
There is no guarantee that committed changes are the result o
On 1/3/14, 8:59 AM, James Hanley wrote:
> Can you expand on this - I am missing where the preceding differences would be
> an issue. From what I can see, if there is a delta, it is either the result
> of
> direct modification or a merge - if the former, that would be the rev
> expanding
> the ke
I am installing apache 2.4.3 and subversion 1.8.5 and I keep getting this error
when starting apache:
Unknown DAV provider: svn
I researched the internet and reread the INSTALL instructions in subversion and
I can’t get it to work.
Here is my apache config:
DAV svn <— this line causes t
On 03.01.2014 21:15, Listman wrote:
> I am installing apache 2.4.3 and subversion 1.8.5 and I keep getting this
> error when starting apache:
>
> Unknown DAV provider: svn
>
> I researched the internet and reread the INSTALL instructions in subversion
> and I can’t get it to work.
>
> Here is m
Thanks for the idea of checking for incompatibility.
ZK
On Jan 3, 2014, at 3:31 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 03.01.2014 21:15, Listman wrote:
>> I am installing apache 2.4.3 and subversion 1.8.5 and I keep getting this
>> error when starting apache:
>>
>> Unknown DAV provider: svn
>>
>>
On 1/2/2014 5:25 PM, Mike Fochtman wrote:
Currently the team hasn't used any form of version control on these
applications because 'it would be too hard...'
I think you can get 99% of the way there by making sure that application
'A' is under full version control. Some version control is bette
> On Jan 3, 2014, at 12:58 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
>
>> On 1/3/14, 8:59 AM, James Hanley wrote:
>> Can you expand on this - I am missing where the preceding differences would
>> be
>> an issue. From what I can see, if there is a delta, it is either the result
>> of
>> direct modification or a m
