[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: revision/version numbers
From: |
Jim.Hyslop |
Subject: |
RE: revision/version numbers |
Date: |
Fri, 31 Oct 2003 17:47:16 -0500 |
address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden wrote:
> Labels are not immutable; they can be moved around. Some
> shops deliberately
> use floating labels, e.g. to identify the latest sources
> eligible for build.
Then the label should clearly indicate it's the "latest version". A version
handed off to QA is not the latest version, and should have a unique label.
> This cuts down on clutter under several methodologies. Under
> such conditions,
> pulling from a specific (floating) label may NOT pull the
> expected code.
> (Note also that if every build is labelled explicitly, it
> doesn't take long
> before there are literally thousands of labels applied to
> files
So don't label every build. You label the *important* builds - the ones that
you may need to reproduce exactly later. Such as the ones you hand off to
QA.
> Also, it may be that the Q/A department uses a whitebox
> approach and focuses
> its efforts on the code contained by files that have changed
> since the last
> testing cycle.
Well, first of all, the original poster (Katherine) indicated that the QA
department were not programmers, so I doubt they're doing white box testing.
In any case, 'cvs diff' can tell you what has changed between tags.
--
Jim