🚀 go-pugleaf

federico@heinz.in-berlin.de (Federico Heinz) writes:

>In article <15mcs2INNj31@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> isbell@cats.ucsc.edu (Art Isbell)  
>writes:
>> NeXTSTEP app architecture is getting quite complex
>> under 3.0.  No longer is an app development confined to a
>> single directory even in the simplest case. So
>> implementing version control has become more
>> difficult.
>> 
>> However, CVS (Concurrent Versions System) seems up to
>> the task, especially version 1.3.  However,
>> ProjectBuilder and InterfaceBuilder don't work with
>> CVS very well.

>You guys at NeXT, if there is *any* chance, PLEASE fix this, or give us a  
>decent workaround. CVS really is such a nice version/configuration control  
>system, so wonderfully unintrusive that I would really hate to have to give  
>it up. Furthermore, I guess the described behavior (losing all non  
>IB-generated files within a directory kept under revision control) will break  
>quite a lot of other administrative schemes I have seen.

>PLEASE, take a look at it. Project management is a very important issue, and  
>you are blowing a hole into my (and Art's, and certainly a lot of other  
>people's) work environment.

I concur.  As a professional software developer, IMO any system that
claims to be a hot development platform but doesn't provide a method
for version control, configuration management, etc., has a major hole
that needs filling.  Since CVS and RCS are free and good, why not
make them work?  Easier than coming up with something brand new, and
better than doing nothing.

If the previous statements to which I'm adding my voice are erroneous,
or you're already doing something, feel free to ignore us.  Otherwise,
don't.  :~)
-- 
Royce Howland   --   Everything is IMHO   |  "I can eat enormous quantities
royce@splunge.uucp        (NeXTMail OK)   |   of ice-cream without being sick,
or royce%splunge@atlantis.uucp            |   Mrs. S-C-U-M."  --Mr. Neutron
or alberta!atlantis!splunge!royce or ...  |   C86Net: Mr._Neutron@RT.Alta