The only way to accomplish this is called version control but since you do not want to use version control ..
how do you achieve intelligent merging *on the same component codebase* without version control ? Martin ______________________________________________ Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung / Disclaimer and confidentiality note Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen. This message is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, we kindly ask you to please inform the sender. Any unauthorised dissemination or copying hereof is prohibited. This message serves for information purposes only and shall not have any legally binding effect. Given that e-mails can easily be subject to manipulation, we can not accept any liability for the content provided. > Subject: RE: Possible problem when multiple developers depend on SNAPSHOT > versions > Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:18:53 -0400 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > +10 > > ________________________________ > > From: B Smith-Mannschott [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wed 3/25/2009 5:49 PM > To: Maven Users List > Subject: Re: Possible problem when multiple developers depend on SNAPSHOT > versions > > > > With all due respect to others' responses, the scenario described > below is not due to misuse or lack of version control. Indeed, the > scenario below clearly describes version control *working as > designed*. > > Bob finds himself unwittingly building snapshots of 2.2, while his > project continues to depend on snapshots of 2.1, so he doesn't see his > own changes. The problem, however, is neither source control nor > maven: it's lack of communication. > > Something like cutting a release needs to be coordinated among the > developers working on a component. Alice and Bob need to talk to each > other about library Foo, particularly with respect to cutting a > release. There's no way around this. > > // ben > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 20:10, Trevor Harmon <[email protected]> wrote: > > Consider this scenario: > > > > Alice and Bob are working independently on two different applications, AppA > > and AppB. Both applications depend on an in-house shared library, Foo, that > > Alice and Bob are working on together. They have both checked out Foo's > > trunk and are regularly committing changes to it. > > > > Because Foo is undergoing heavy development, AppA and AppB depend on Foo > > 2.1-SNAPSHOT, but now Foo is looking pretty stable, and Alice's AppA needs > > some of the features scheduled for Foo 2.2, so she decides to perform a > > release of Foo 2.1 and does the usual release procedure: > > > > 1) Changes Foo's version from 2.1-SNAPSHOT to 2.1 and checks it into the > > trunk > > 2) Deploys Foo 2.1 to the company's internal repository > > 3) Tags the Foo trunk as the 2.1 release branch > > 4) Changes Foo's version from 2.1 to 2.2-SNAPSHOT and checks it into the > > trunk > > 5) Changes AppA's dependency to point to Foo 2.2-SNAPSHOT > > > > But what about Bob? He's still working with Foo 2.1-SNAPSHOT for his AppB. > > If he updates his working copy of Foo's source code, any changes he makes to > > Foo will be built as a 2.2-SNAPSHOT release, since Foo's trunk is now > > 2.2-SNAPSHOT. This is a major problem because his AppB has a dependency on > > 2.1-SNAPSHOT, so the next time he tests AppB, it will pick up the old Foo > > 2.1-SNAPSHOT, ignoring any changes Bob makes in Foo. He will probably waste > > a lot of time debugging, at least until he happens to notice that Foo's > > version has changed. > > > > What can be done to prevent Bob's problem? > > > > Trevor > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live™ SkyDrive: Get 25 GB of free online storage. http://windowslive.com/online/skydrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_skydrive_032009
