Question on .rev file format

[Monte Goulding]

> > I haven't used CVS but it seems to be the industry standard.
>
> CVS is great, but it's also very old and difficult to configure.
> Hopefully Subversion will replace CVS as an industry standard.
> http://subversion.tigris.org/

This says it handles binary files but I guess we don't really have a way of
relating a change in the file to a change in the stack.
>
> >  I was thinking that creating a rev based front end for CVS would be
> > ideal. I don't think
> > that a Rev system would handle multiple concurrent users very well (at
> > least
> > not without a great deal of work). On the other hand modelling all rev
> > objects in a database could result in something unique: multi-user
> > concurrent programming. Like an internet whiteboard but with stacks ;-)
>
> It sounds appealing, but I'm having troubling imagining how RR would
> interface with a traditional version control system like CVS or
> Subversion.

I think if you had a save button that saved the stack as a mess of xml files
and commited them to cvs and a button that sucked them out of cvs and built
the stack and saved it to a temp folder that would work????
>
> I can, however, envision something closely tied to the IDE that is
> aware of the property inspector, the script editor, etc. and tracks
> changes into a "change library" as the user works. Specifically written
> for the RR IDE. Unrelated to CVS. IBM's Visual Age for Java had nice
> implementation of this concept. It was pretty slow though.

I think that's where I was going with modelling rev objects in a database.
That would handle the multi-developer bit but bringing in version rollback
would make it a very complex DB.

> + Use team coding where you would otherwise have multiple developers
> working on the same source code simultaneously via CVS.
>
Hmmm... now if we could only apply that to the networked world. What about
using IM (jabber or something) to broadcast changes? If it was done well
then any field could instantly become a chatroom ;-) A log could be
maintained for rollback.

Hmmm... I think this is worth some thought ;-)

Why would this be bad? I guess if two people are trying to change the same
part of the same script or something but you would think it wouldn't happen
very often and would be obvious to both parties very quickly. Perhaps it's
the next stage in extreme programming?

> + Write a plugin for the Rev IDE that would version control scripts via
> CVS, but would not attempt to deal with the overall project structure
> and GUI layout issues.
>

It would be relatively simple to develop an interface to a script library
CVS and suck the scripts into a stack prior to using it.

> Just food for thought. Don't get me wrong, I think source control is a
> great thing.
>

I think you're right. We need something built for Rev. A system designed for
lots of little files and package structures needed in Java etc will never
work right in Rev.

Cheers

Monte