Boston Linux & Unix (BLU) Home | Calendar | Mail Lists | List Archives | Desktop SIG | Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings
Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU

BLU Discuss list archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

version control

On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 05:12:07PM -0400, Stephen Adler wrote:
> Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 17:12:07 -0400
> From: Stephen Adler <adler at>
> To: Blu <discuss at>
> Subject: version control
> Precedence: list
> Guys,
> I'm setting up a new repository for a business I'm consulting for. They 
> are currently a clear case house.
> One thing which I've noticed is that they store all output file from the 
> build into their clearcase repository.
> This goes against my philosophy that the only thing which goes into a 
> source code repository are the files
> which are needed to build the executables, and not the executables 
> themselves. Now I'm having
> seconds thoughts about my "what gets stored in a source code repository" 
> philosophy. Can anyone
> comment on whether its custom to archive the executables as well? One 
> issue is that I'm working
> under a quality system so control of files is required. I supposed this 
> meant control of source files,
> but perhaps control of derived binaries from the source files is also 
> required?
> As usual, all comments are greatly appreciated.
> Cheers. Steve.
> -- 
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at

I'm a fan of using source control for source.  If you need to archive
releases (of course you do), then archive them.

Here's the argument.  Your build system _should_ be able to regenerate
an old release.  For safety's sake, you should archive it so the bits
you ship can be recovered.  But, the requirements (and tools) for
source control are different from those for release archival.

If your company says that they _really_ need to save the generated
code in ClearCase, then do it, but put it in a different VOB.  (You
could even save a snapshot of the source there, too.)

ClearCase can really get bogged down when the VOBS are filled with
binaries.  It complicates your backups, too.


This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities.

Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS!

Boston Linux & Unix /