Jeremy Mordkoff wrote:
>>> I second that. I support fedora 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 (and soon 12),
> various
>>> ubuntu releases, plus windows XP, Vista, and Win7, and Mac OS 10.4,
>>> 10.5. When one of them upgrades, it causes me to scramble to build
> and
>>> deploy upgrades to the others.
>>>
>> But working copies should really be disposable. As long as you keep
> your
>> changes commited, if the format is a problem for a different client,
> just delete
>> it and let that client build what it wants.
>>
>
> Our product also supports that variety of platforms. I request that
> changes be tested on all platforms before the changes are committed.
> That requires the engineer to either use a project branch or access a
> view from multiple machines. Since some machines are shared, sometimes
> views get inadvertently upgraded.
>
And you are not concerned that some uncommitted change in this working copy
might be the thing that makes all your tests pass? I like to make 'svn
checkout' or 'update' the only means to get the source to the testing platforms
to ensure that the test is of a reproducible state.
--
Les Mikesell
[email protected]
Absolutely. We use svn:ignore and svn status to make it easy to make sure such
things don't happen. And then we also have a QA group (this is for developer
testing). I can't say they always adhere to it, but that can't say that
their tools don't support it.
jlm
