Re: [GD-General] Re: asset & document management

[J C L. <cl...@ka...>]

On Mon, 19 May 2003 13:42:39 +0100 
Stefan Boberg <ste...@te...> wrote:

> Hmm... I don't think I would really like to use a revision control
> system where rollback took place locally, using local data. 

Why?

My preferred approach (which uses some properties of BitKeeper and
similar systems) is to have a bit-image copy of the master repository on
the local system.  I then perform operations locally until I'm happy
with the results before sending the changesets up to the master, to the
staging box, departmental master, or whatever.

> Grabbing the latest version is the most common action anyway so this
> might not be such a big issue in practice but in the presence of
> branches there's not always just one "latest" version which
> complicates things ;)

Having the local repository be a first class node (ie other repositories
can be checked out from it etc) removes most of these complications, tho
at the cost of adding some human/organisational requirements.

-- 
J C Lawrence                
---------(*)                Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. 
cl...@ka...               He lived as a devil, eh?		  
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/  Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.