| Experience with Subversion? [message #52088] |
Thu, 17 July 2008 02:23  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Is there anybody out there who is managing EPF models with Subversion?
(i.e., NOT with config mgmt tools using check-in/check-out mechanisms)
Beside general exchange of thoughts, I'd especially be interested in the
question if there is experience with potential model inconsistencies in
case multiple people are working in parallel on model elements, merging
the changes afterwards via SVN.
Are there good practices that should be used with SVN?
I'd be willing to collect the feedback and to prepare a paper from it.
Best regards,
Gerhard
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Experience with Subversion? [message #54656 is a reply to message #52088] |
Wed, 19 November 2008 06:58  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Thanks for your feedback. We ourselves made some experiences in the
meantime; I hope that I'll find the time to prepare a paper concluding all
that in the near future (say: January 2009).
The usage of EPF and SVN together is pretty tricky, and although we took
care, we reached out to corrupt the model two times.
We will have a guideline to use EPF and SVN only via Subclipse
(TortoiseSVN is forbidden for EPF models); in addition, we implemented
some hooks for SVN, ensuring that locks exist and are to be used. This
combination of measures seem to lead to a robust and multi-user-able
solution.
|
|
|
| Re: Experience with Subversion? [message #589928 is a reply to message #52088] |
Thu, 17 July 2008 03:56 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
we've had some experience with SVN.
Most merging problems occur with the "plugin.xmi" -file, and this is
usually
when two persons have added elements at the same time. SVN can
automatically
merge most changes, but the additions to the same place must be done
manually. This is quite straight-forward manual editing though.
One natural way to reduce possible conflicts is to do commits/updates
frequently (automatic batches etc.).
Best regards,
Henrik
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Experience with Subversion? [message #590034 is a reply to message #52423] |
Mon, 04 August 2008 02:59 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
That's an important information, thanks.
All the other SVN users: please be encouraged to reply with your
experiences. It would be extremely helpful to get a big picture of do's
and don't's.
|
|
|
| Re: Experience with Subversion? [message #590326 is a reply to message #52088] |
Tue, 02 September 2008 08:12 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi Gerhard,
we use it with svn as well. we needed intuitive and easy VCS with atomic
changes over model and cheap branching/tagging.
important to know is that SVN is a optimistic VCS, which means that
naturally no locking mechanism are applied over repository and SVN try
merge automatically.
therefore problem is in changing reference files of model (what are:
plugin.xmi and library.xmi). especially plugin.xmi can be change quit
often. we try prevent problem in this place with combination of rules:
1. commit often - even when requirement is not fullfilled
2. inspired with this guideline
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/feb07/per aire/index.html
we have one person responsible to prepare model sketch (which contains
method atributes changed in plugin.xmi)
3. one person is responsible for solving merge conflict (the same as
preparing model sketch)
concerning point 1. we use branching and tagging. we have 2 branches:
- trunk (stabile) which contains version ready to publish
- modeling branch - which contains preparing version which is after
review merged to trunk
definitelly SVN is better choise as cvs. :-)
all the best,
jan masaryk
Gerhard Schneider wrote:
> Is there anybody out there who is managing EPF models with Subversion?
> (i.e., NOT with config mgmt tools using check-in/check-out mechanisms)
>
> Beside general exchange of thoughts, I'd especially be interested in the
> question if there is experience with potential model inconsistencies in
> case multiple people are working in parallel on model elements, merging
> the changes afterwards via SVN.
>
> Are there good practices that should be used with SVN?
>
> I'd be willing to collect the feedback and to prepare a paper from it.
>
> Best regards,
> Gerhard
>
|
|
|
| Re: Experience with Subversion? [message #590851 is a reply to message #53169] |
Fri, 07 November 2008 08:08 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi Gerhard,
We are using SVN in EPF with the same rules:
- commit often
- have a model sketch prepared by only one person
As we are a small team modelling the processes (5 persons), we talk to
each other if there is a locked file.
We never used the merge function. Does it work well?
Best Regards,
Isabela
|
|
|
| Re: Experience with Subversion? [message #590984 is a reply to message #52088] |
Wed, 19 November 2008 06:58 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Thanks for your feedback. We ourselves made some experiences in the
meantime; I hope that I'll find the time to prepare a paper concluding all
that in the near future (say: January 2009).
The usage of EPF and SVN together is pretty tricky, and although we took
care, we reached out to corrupt the model two times.
We will have a guideline to use EPF and SVN only via Subclipse
(TortoiseSVN is forbidden for EPF models); in addition, we implemented
some hooks for SVN, ensuring that locks exist and are to be used. This
combination of measures seem to lead to a robust and multi-user-able
solution.
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04215 seconds
Home