Re: CVS Update Behaviour

[Greg A. Woods]

[ On , February 21, 2002 at 18:55:21 (-0500), Arcin Bozkurt - Archie wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: CVS Update Behaviour
>
> On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 17:45, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > 
> > Don't get stuck on this idea of trying to keep track of everything back
> > to the beginning of time with one RCS file. 
> 
> So, you don't believe that history of those files are that important.

Of course it's important -- it's your record of what happened to that
code through its lifetime.  It can tell you how bugs were fixed in the
past, and how new bugs were introduced, and all kinds of management
level information such as how many lines of code changed, who changed
them, etc., etc., etc.

It just doesn't have to be all in the same RCS file.  The idea that it
should is a very dangerous fallacy, esp. w.r.t. to CVS.

> Well, it may i guess be true. And as a followup, you are suggesting to
> keep the old big module as an "in case" reference,

Yes, absolutely!

> and start fresh with
> new modules.

Exactly.

Just as when a file is "renamed" in CVS via "cvs add" & "cvs rm", there
may be some easy way for you to do the initial commit of the unchanged
but re-organised files so that there's a comment in the new file giving
a reference to its location in the old module (and vice versa with a
final "empty" commit in the old module if you really want to make the
history easy to follow in both directions).

-- 
                                                                Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;  <address@hidden>;  <address@hidden>;  <address@hidden>
Planix, Inc. <address@hidden>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <address@hidden>