Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XP] Re: Looking back - What we really use Source Control for...

Expand Messages
  • Bill de hÓra
    ... Classpath hell :) The answer is to own the build process instead of it owning you. One of the first things to do to win back control is to know exactly
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 4, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      John Brewer wrote:

      > You can still hose yourself with Java and Ant. I had one developer
      > (the project manager, actually) who couldn't build my code. After
      > much hair-pulling, we discovered that he had an older version of
      > xerces.jar in his "ext" folder. That trumped the version that was on
      > the classpath.
      >
      > These days, for a Java project, I'd be inclined to use CruiseControl
      > on a dedicated build machine with a well-defined configuration.

      Classpath hell :)

      The answer is to own the build process instead of it owning you. One
      of the first things to do to win back control is to know exactly
      what libraries the build needs to link in to work, including in
      Java's case, Java. With that, you can build anywhere.

      Bill de hÓra
    • Joe Swatosh
      ... We have a script that scrubs the build and installation directories every night, then rebuilds (including unit tests) and installs the system for
      Message 2 of 3 , Feb 4, 2003
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Steve Berczuk [mailto:berczuk@...]
        > John Brewer wrote:
        > > --- In extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com, "Kyle Cordes"
        > > I think it depends on how seriously you take your build

        > The other questions could include ones about the tradeoff
        > between time
        > to build a clean machine, vs time spent NOT doing a build, and also
        > reproducibility.
        > I guess that I am pretty much a fan of doing a 'clean' (for some
        > definition of clean') periodically.
        >
        > Also, there is something nice to be able to have a machine
        > with only a
        > very basic setup, check out 'stuff' from version control, and
        > then build
        > the appropriate version of the system. (perhaps including the right
        > compiler, etc...)
        >

        We have a script that scrubs the build and installation directories every night, then rebuilds (including unit tests) and installs the system for acceptance tests. Every time we are bitten by a bad assumption (last week the PATH got messed up) we write an "environment" test that runs with the unit tests. We now test for the existence of particular service packs, for the non-existence of others, and since it's windows in some cases we test for the link time of the DLLs that have been loaded....

        Works for us so far.


        Joe Swatosh [mailto:joe-swatosh@...]
        3305 Main St. Suite 201
        Vancouver, WA 98663
        360-737-6654 ext 201
      • Dmitri Colebatch
        From: Caroline Foster ... to add my 2c.... which is what I think Caroline is saying... User: I have a problem doing .....
        Message 3 of 3 , Feb 5, 2003
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          From: "Caroline Foster" <carolinefoster@...>
          > I regard it as a basic programmer's right that I should be able to, at any
          > time, check out all the source code and build it.

          to add my 2c.... which is what I think Caroline is saying...

          User: I have a problem doing .....
          Developer: Hmm, works fine for me, what build are you using?
          User: Build 114
          Developer: Give me a minute, ahhh yes - I can see now. That has
          inadvertantly been fixed in build 115

          _that_ is why I use source control

          and so that I can throw away my changes at any point

          cheers
          dim
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.