Taking the plunge...

Sun Dec 4 05:23:08 CST 2011

Steve,
The reason I asked about AppBuilder is that it has a weird quirk when
saving a "desktop ui" sourcefile (SmartObjects or not). Even if you
don't change anything in the ui controls (only some other code f.i.),
AppBuilder saves that ui code differently then when you opened it,
causing unwanted and unpredictable changes, and possibly rather
difficult to solve conflicts when others update their sandbox with your
changes, if they are working on that source too. RoundTable doesn't
suffer from it, because it always stores the complete file for every
version (if I'm correctly informed) instead of a delta, very probably
because the creators knew of the quirk. But as you seem to only work
with a web ui, you shouldn't have problems with that phenomenon I guess.
This is with OE10.2B.
And btw, we use Subversion for the moment, where everybody commits to
the central repo, into trunk (no branches, yet).
Johan

On 04-12-2011 0:48, Steve Dyer wrote:
> Hi Johan, currently yes we do use it but not really in its fullest
> i.e. SmartObjects. Our app is actually webspeed but we use a third
> party product (Sandersons EOrganiser framework) which takes html pages
> we write in a standard html editor,and generates the webspeed for us
> into an include. We then referencce this along with some other core
> framework includes into a progress container object which maps to the
> two objects together. The framework then pulls it altogether at runtime.
>
> We're currently going through a slow upgrade to OE10 which should be
> done in the next few months so then we will be on Architect.
>
> Are you using Progress with Mercurial then?
>
> Steve
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From*: Johan Samyn <johan.samyn at gmail.com>
> *To*: Steve Dyer
> *Cc*: Mercurial at selenic.com <Mercurial at selenic.com>
> *Sent*: Sat Dec 03 23:24:04 2011
> *Subject*: Re: Taking the plunge...
>
> Steve,
> Are you using the Progress AppBuilder for the GUI ?
> Johan
>
> On 03-12-2011 20:26, Steve Dyer wrote:
>>
>> Hi, I am looking into migrating my development teams over to the
>> wonders of Mercurial, but have many questions running through my head
>> about how to achieve this, or even whether Mercurial is the right tool.
>>
>> We are a Progress development house (www.progress.com for those who
>> haven't heard of Progress......probably everyone!), and currently use
>> a vendor sourced SCM called Roundtable. Roundtable is written in, and
>> promoted by Progress so that is why we have it.  It also comes in at
>> about £2k per developer, plus an annual maintenance/support package. 
>> It is very rigid, and very strict, but to be fair has served us
>> well.  However massive growth and cent offshoring/cosourcing of
>> development has meant we need to start looking down a different
>> path......thus Mercurial.
>>
>> I have done a lot of reading,and a lot of investigation around a
>> variety of tools, and in fact in my distant past I was a user of SVN,
>> so some of the concepts of Mercurial aren't new to me.  Recently I
>> have focused my research into GIT and Mercurial, and for, in part,
>> political reasons, Mercurial has now been thrust to the top of the list.
>>
>> My first task really was to work out a suitable SCM strategy, and
>> supporting developer/release work flows.  I stumbled across a very
>> good article on this very idea, which although focused on GIT, the
>> concepts are perfect for how we work, and from the posts on that
>> article this can work with Mercurial too.  My problem is I can't
>> visualise how exactly, day to day, Mercurial fits into this
>> strategy.  The article is here
>> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>>
>> My question(s) really is, how would one go about working with a
>> strategy like this?  Where this article refers to branching (feature
>> branch, release branch etc) would they be clones in Mercurial land?? 
>>
>> Of course that strategy there may not be the best approach, so if
>> anyone can point me to some better examples of Mercurial usage that
>> would be great.  We currently have around 30 developers, some based
>> in the same office, some offshore and some offsite.  Our code base is
>> some 10,0000 files amounting to about 1gig at a guess.  It's worth
>> mentioning too that this application serves 6 businesses in effect. 
>> Each business is an internationals variant or like a franchise of our
>> uk business.  As a result we have currently a single core codebase,
>> and this then feeds into 6 sub code bases.  The main reason for this
>> is economy of scale for our sub businesses, and it gives us the
>> ability to feed functionality etc developed for one business out to
>> our others.  So our code base currently looks a little like this
>> hierarchically :
>>
>> Level 1 : Dev
>> Level 2 : TestSpain TestFrance TestUSA TestItaly
>> Level 3 : ProdSpain ProdFrance ProdUSA ProdItaly
>>
>> So dev feeds into 6, and then each of those feeds into the
>> appropriate Prod.  Then within the code itself we have switches etc
>> to say "IF Business is France THEN DO....".  Not white that crude,
>> but you get the idea.
>>
>> Anyway, that's a bit of brain dump, so apologies but I wanted to sort
>> of put that out there in the hope that I can prompt some Mercurial
>> gods to see it and go "hey that's easy,  you need to do this....", or
>> at least say "nah, you should go and read this before posting that on
>> here"
>>
>> Many thanks for at least reading all that and getting this far down
>> before deleting!
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> *** This email has been scanned by HomeServe’s MessageLabs Email
>> Security System.
>> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ***
>>
>> This e-mail and its attachments are strictly confidential. If you are
>> not the intended recipient please delete the e-mail (including
>> attachments) from your system without printing copying disclosing or
>> otherwise using its contents. If you have received this e-mail in
>> error please notify us immediately by e-mail or telephone on 0845 149
>> 8000. Any e-mails sent in an employee's personal capacity are not
>> sent on behalf of us and are the personal responsibility of the sender.
>>
>> Whilst we make every effort to ensure that this e-mail is free from
>> viruses this cannot be guaranteed. We therefore recommend that you
>> scan all e-mails with appropriate virus checking software.
>>
>> Homeserve plc is registered under company number 2648297. Homeserve
>> Claims Management Limited is registered under company number 3913960.
>> Homeserve Membership Limited is registered under company number 2770612.
>>
>> All the above companies are registered in England, and each has its
>> registered office at Cable Drive, Walsall, WS2 7BN.
>>
>> Homeserve Membership Limited is authorised and regulated by the
>> Financial Services Authority under registration number 312518.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mercurial mailing list
>> Mercurial at selenic.com
>> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>
>
> -- 
> Johan Samyn
> _______________________________________________________________
> "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add,
> but when there is nothing left to take away."
> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
>
> *** This email has been scanned by HomeServe’s MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
> If you are having a problem with your emails please contact the
> Service Desk on 55555 ***
>
> Please think before you print! Reduce your impact on the environment
> by choosing not to print this email.
>
> *** This email has been scanned by HomeServe’s MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ***
>
> This e-mail and its attachments are strictly confidential. If you are
> not the intended recipient please delete the e-mail (including
> attachments) from your system without printing copying disclosing or
> otherwise using its contents. If you have received this e-mail in
> error please notify us immediately by e-mail or telephone on 0845 149
> 8000. Any e-mails sent in an employee's personal capacity are not sent
> on behalf of us and are the personal responsibility of the sender.
>
> Whilst we make every effort to ensure that this e-mail is free from
> viruses this cannot be guaranteed. We therefore recommend that you
> scan all e-mails with appropriate virus checking software.
>
> Homeserve plc is registered under company number 2648297. Homeserve
> Claims Management Limited is registered under company number 3913960.
> Homeserve Membership Limited is registered under company number 2770612.
>
> All the above companies are registered in England, and each has its
> registered office at Cable Drive, Walsall, WS2 7BN.
>
> Homeserve Membership Limited is authorised and regulated by the
> Financial Services Authority under registration number 312518.

-- 
Johan Samyn
_______________________________________________________________
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add,
but when there is nothing left to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20111204/cdf45ca0/attachment.html>