...or know that one of the developers had already downloaded a copy of the buggy code (during that 4 hour or so window) which promptly stomped on the bug fix when it got committed.
I'm a little confused by this. Why did the other developer download the script from the live site rather than from CVS (I assume you're using CVS - either that or, when committed, the script is now in some insane asylum somewhere :). If they had retrieved it from CVS, they/you would have seen the conflict at commit time.
What we've found that works is a BSD jail for each developer, and commit direct from the jail or from their machine. That way, we don't touch live code until we have to. Usually, we also need a "hack script" to set up the jail so that it mimics the live environment, but thats often no more than a few soft links to modules etc.
Our versioning system used to be:
This actually worked quite well until we went from one room to three rooms :) - but is a method I do NOT endorse anymore - even if you're the only person working on a project.
Perhaps you can gain brownie points for suggesting amendments to your current practice? Or just give that other developer a slap on the wrist and shout "USE CVS" at them a few times?
.02
cLive ;-)
In reply to Re: That nagging feeling and the little voice in the back of your head
by cLive ;-)
in thread That nagging feeling and the little voice in the back of your head
by tachyon
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |