Re: [Firebird-devel] Obsolete files in Vulcan.

[Brad P. <br...@li...>]

Jim Starkey wrote:
> Claudio Valderrama C. wrote:
> 
>> Jim, do you plan to carry dudley, ipserver, journal and wal in Vulcan? If
>> not, wouldn't it be better to delete all files in those directories? Only
>> dudley remains in FB2 and mostly by inertia.
>>
>> I wasn't aware of those files still living in Vulcan until a bulk
>> replacement by you marked them as modified in my source comparisons.
>>
>>  
>>
> No, I don't plan to delete them any time soon.  History is important to 
> understand the future.  Wal is useless since it never worked, the 
> journal was a good subsystem that people can still learn from.  Dudley, 
> particularly the trigger language, is a good template on how to write a 
> language processor, something that some stuck from maintaining the dog 
> ISQL could learn from.
> 
> I almost always leave old colde around commented out wiht /*** and ***/ 
> until I am absolutely certain that the replacement code not only works, 
> but don't introduce new problems.

I'd have to argue with you one this (though as an outsider its basically 
just arguing for the sake of argument!).  The history of changes is what 
your revision management software is for and let cvs handle it.  I think 
leaving source code files around that are no longer used is likely to 
cause more confusion than anything else and as long as you are using cvs 
you can always still get at the files if you need to bring them back to 
life.

I also think all those comments when code is changed showing how it was 
before are an eye-sore and harmful to readability and again thats what 
your revision control software is for.  Use it!

The coding style of leaving all the old crud around all the time was a 
good idea before use of revision control software but the gains are no 
longer there and its harmful to readability and should go.

Just the perhaps not-so-humble opinion of a dedicated cvs user!

-- 
Brad Pepers
br...@li...