Quote:
Originally Posted by Airhead315
Cool. I will say however, make sure you get civic involved in the setup if possible. If this is going to work we need our main developer to be involved. It would be good if we could setup the server with the current version he is working off of. The advantage to SVN is that you can revert to older code version VERY easily. He may not be ok with collaboration like this because it can be very easy to end up with a non-working build that was not the fault of civic. This could easily be remedied by him rolling back the version of one of the files to a known working copy but it adds a layer of confusion for him as someone may have made changes in an area he is working on. It is my suggestion that you keep the list of users who can modify the code to a very small group of people who have demonstrated knowledge of what they are doing.
One of the awesome benefits of SVN is a non contributing member could download the source and modify it, locally on their machine, to play around with. If someone, who has access, commits changes this user can simply run an "svn update" and download all of the changes that were made since the last time they updated. If they happen to solve a known problem they can do an easy diff between the build they started with and theirs and propose specific changes to solve that problem. Then someone, who has access, can commit those changes to the current working build and decide if that person should be allowed access to commit changes themselves.
|
Your second paragraph is key. Civic could just only accept diff patches and then incorporate them himself, if he was worried about broken builds. Otherwise just have people only commit code that works. Shrug.