That's incorrect [LWN.net]

That's incorrect

Posted May 5, 2008 3:23 UTC (Mon) by rganesan (subscriber, #1182)
In reply to: That's incorrect by JoeBuck
Parent article: Subversion considers its future

> I play in both the corporate development world and the free software 
> world, and anyone who thinks that corporate software development could be 
> possible without a VCS is sorely mistaken. On the contrary, a VCS is 
> vital.

I am in total agreement. I also play both in corporate development as well as free software
world. Anyone who claims corporate development can work without VCS has never worked in one.
With projects having upwards of 400 developers actively committing every day, do you guys
seriously believe corporates can manage with a tar ball?

I don't know if a distributed VCS would be very useful in a corporate setup. One of the
biggest advantages of a distributed VCS (as I understand it) is to allow experimentation with
a private branch.  In a centralized VCS, a private branch gets created for this but it still
stays centralized. "Distributed" in corporate development usually means a centralized but
multi-site VCS.

(Log in to post comments)

That's incorrect

Posted May 5, 2008 11:51 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Sure they can manage with a tarball. Everyone shares one huge build tree 
with all the source code and generated binaries in it: it gets `make 
clean'ed and tarred every night.

(Not only have I worked at places that did this, *not even the tarring job 
was automated*. People can put up with a lot if they have no idea anything 
better is possible.)