[Zope] Zope/CVS/SVN - Options?

[Chris McDonough]

I've written a small piece on the way I prefer to handle this:

http://www.plope.org/Members/chrism/zope_collab

On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 09:43 -0400, Kelly McDonald wrote:
> I am curious as to how people are approaching source code management,
> especially in environments where there are several developers and where
> branches are being used as sandboxes. 
> 
> 
> We are currently using RevisionManager, but we haven't been using this
> in conjunction with branches, has anyone been doing this, and if so,
> what has your experience with this been?
> (longer text of our current practice and where we would like to go is at
> the end.)
> 
> Is there a standard accepted practice for using source code control with
> zope (especially for stuff that would be stored in the ZODB), or is Zope
> most often being used in an environment where this isn't necessary?
> 
> Comments/ suggestions are appreciated.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Kelly McDonald.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For historical reasons, almost all of our code/business logic is
> contained in the ZODB in the form of python scripts/ DTML, etc. (data is
> stored in a SQL server, postgres) We realize that it would be better to
> get that stuff out of the ZODB, but we didn't know that when we started,
> so now we are stuck with a codebase that is all in the ZODB. 
> 
> We have been using Revision Manager to keep our changes in CVS, but we
> haven't been using branches at all. This has worked OK with two
> developers, however as we are adding a third and possibly a fourth
> (sorry, already on staff, not hiring right now!), we see branches as a
> requirement. I realize that RM has some options for using branches, but
> it doesn't seem particularly efficient when compared to using cvs/svn
> directly on the FS. We are currently looking at APE with a file system
> volume (see my previous post) but are uncertain if APE has been proven
> yet, even though it has a 1.0 version. 
> 
> For us, the holy grail would be able to have all of our objects on the
> file-system for source control, and be able to use GUI tools for cvs/svn
> (no flames please, I prefer CLI, but we have developers who are used to
> VB,etc) and not take a performance hit for doing any of this. 
> 
>