Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/08/07/20:49:40
Shane:
> Thank you for the tip. Actually I am using Visual Source Safe as the
> Source Management tool.
> I was considering the use of CVS, but decided against at the last
> moment because most of the fellow developers including me, had been
> using VSS for a considerable amount of time, and felt that the
> migration from a VSS to CVS would take a some time. Similarly for
> Make. We are primarily a group of developers who are conversent with
> MS Windows than the Unix environment. Cygwin basically gives us the
> power of bash scripting and the "ease" of Windows at the same time. :)
"Visual" tools can give neophytes a boost, but typically become
cumbersome as complexity increases. Command-line tools require more
learning effort up front, but scale better because they are completely
customizable.
I agree that integrating Visual Studio products, CVS, and/or Make is a
non-trivial undertaking. (The roles "tool smith" and "build meister"
come to mind.) But, I'm now learning C#, .NET, ASP.NET, Mono,
Apache/mod_mono, etc., and will be going through this process by
necessity. (I'd like to be able to write C# libraries and build/run
console and web applications on both Windows and Debian GNU/Linux).
> What I am trying to do is, checkout the source to the build directory
> and if there are any local changes in my working directory copy them
> to the build directory, build and do a test run from there. This is
> so that I can test my code before I do the actual check in.
Make has RCS (and CVS?) integration features that allow it to do a
checkout/ update prior to a build. However, I typically use the tools
separately, so I can control what happens when and see the results
before deciding what to do next.
David
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -