Home » Language IDEs » Java Development Tools (JDT) » Eclipse 2.1.2 and CVS Much Grief
| Eclipse 2.1.2 and CVS Much Grief [message #125541] |
Tue, 09 December 2003 10:37  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: groberts.seabase.com
I am forwarding this e-mail to the this list in an attempt to
troubleshoot the following problems. I am epecially concerned with the
first of these issues.
These discussed in the message below are located in the UK and are using
eclipse 2.1.2 and 2.1.1 to access a cvs repository located in Ann Arbor,
MI.
I am the administrator of the cvs repository in question. I have never
encountered any thing like the following.
Taken from the message below:
>...we had the opportunity on two occasions to see
> this real[ly] was a technical issue by seeing two machines (different
> logons) both connected to the same repository. Both refreshed and both
> showing and downloading different versions...
Thanks in advance.
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003 14:57:49 -0000, "David Markwell"
<david@clinical-info.co.uk> said:
> Laura,
>
> Here is my contribution on the woes of using CVS is a real time critical
> project.
>
> I have seen clear evidence of both the first issue identified by Kevin -
> version inconsistency. This has cost the project many hours of
> development work and substantial elapsed time on the final deliverables
> due to people working on out of date copies. As compared to a simple FTP
> posting solution where you at least know what you are dealing with there
> have been many occasions when we simply have not known we were working
> on out of date material. The potential stress on working relationships
> is enormous. Fortunately we had the opportunity on two occasions to see
> this real was a technical issue by seeing two machines (different
> logons) both connected to the same repository. Both refreshed and both
> showing and downloading different versions. The only explanation seems
> to relate as Kevin suggests to the fact that you can see your own
> updates (reported as synchonised and no differences from repository) but
> other users cannot (and also have machines showing that they are
> synchronised to the repository). It is possible I guess that there is
> some mirroring somewhere in the internet cause this assynchronous
> behaviour and possible some hidden option in the software that might
> override this. However used out of the box and following the
> instructions (repeatedly) this seems to be a very real problem.
>
> I have also had several instances of the second type of issue where the
> connection drops for large updates. However, in my case this was
> associated on four separated occassions with "damage" to my in-house
> network and router requiring it to be reset before I could see the world
> again. Again you could question if this is a result of CVS or Eclipse or
> just something in my system. However, I would simply say I had this
> problem ONLY when using Ecliplse and CVS and the first I knew of the
> error each time was a CVS fail. Thereafter email and http failed across
> my entire network (of five computers) and reset of the router was the
> way I restored it. First time it took sometime to track this down as the
> solution - after that at least I knew how to fix it in five minutes! In
> the meantime I have been communicating repeatedly by http, email and ftp
> with no other failures. Thus the evidence points fairly and squarely at
> CVS/Eclipse.
>
> I have not seen the third type of problem but that may be as Kevin says
> because they used the same logon.
>
> I think this is a delightful though sad illustration of the "Total Cost
> of Ownership" argument in favour of paying for the software. In the
> worst case with the commercial approach you then have someone to swear
> at - and feel justified in doing so (thanks Bill!). Having a shout at
> "open source volunteers" never feels quite right but believe me I have
> been tempted over the last six weeks!
>
> Kind Regards
>
> David Markwell
>
> The Clinical Information Consultancy
> 93 Wantage Road, Reading, Berkshire, RG30 2SN, UK
> Tel: +44-118-9584954
> Mobile: +44-7850-600-955
> Web: http://www.clinical-info.co.uk
> Mailto:david@clinical-info.co.uk
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kevin Brown [mailto:kb_hl7@hotmail.com]
> > Sent: 09 December 2003 13:40
> > To: laura.sato@nhsia.nhs.uk; DAVID@CLINICAL-INFO.CO.UK;
> > MikeW@qxlva.com; andy@qxlva.com
> > Subject: RE: problems with CVS
> >
> >
> > Hi Laura,
> >
> > No problem, below is a list of the major problems we faced during
> > development:
> >
> > - Inconsistent versioning between users - This issue
> > caused more project
> > delays than any other. When a developer checks in updated or
> > new files it
> > was assumed that a second developer could immediately access
> > these changes,
> > yet despite numerous attempts it appeared that only the developer who
> > checked the new versions in could see them. It sometimes
> > took up to 24hrs
> > for updates to be made available to all developer .
> >
> > - Session timeouts - During long updates (usually over
> > 5mb) CVS would
> > end a developer's session causing them to have to restart the
> > update again.
> >
> > - CVS locking - When a developer is logged into CVS and a second
> > developer tries to log in at the same time the second
> > developer's PC locks
> > until the first developer has completed their CVS session.
> > This may be due
> > to the fact all QXLVA developers were logging in using Andy's logon
> > credentials?
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kevin
> > kevinb@qxlva.com
> >
> > >From: "Sato Laura" <laura.sato@nhsia.nhs.uk>
> > >To: "Markwell David (Internet)"
> > ><DAVID@CLINICAL-INFO.CO.UK>,<kb_hl7@hotmail.com>,<MikeW@qxlva
> > .com>,<andy@qxlva.com>
> > >Subject: problems with CVS
> > >Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 11:28:01 -0000
> > >
> > >David, Kevin, Mike, and Andy,
> > >
> > >If you get this message in time, can you do me a favour and send a
> > >short summary or description of the issues you encountered
> > with using
> > >CVS to the V3 Tools Task Force list? It might be useful for us to
> > >discuss this at today's task force teleconference, but it
> > would be good
> > >to get it documented (for potential follow-up with the CVS
> > experts) at
> > >any rate.
> > >
> > >This is a request on behalf of the task force, so it's a
> > relatively low
> > >priority. From my project perspective, I'm happy to use whatever
> > >works, but from the HL7 longer-term view, I'd be interested in
> > >bottoming out why CVS was causing problems for us.
> > >
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Laura
> > >________________________________________
> > >Laura Sato
> > >Informatics Standards Lead
> > >Communications & Messaging
> > >NHS National Programme for IT
> > >email: laura.sato@nhsia.nhs.uk
> > >phone: (44) (0)7733 324 338
> > >
> > >
> > >This e-mail is confidential and privileged. If you are not
> > the intended
> > >recipient please accept our apologies; please do not
> > disclose, copy or
> > >distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in
> > reliance on its
> > >contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be
> > unlawful. Please
> > >inform us that this message has gone astray before deleting
> > it. Thank you
> > >for your co-operation.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________ _____
> > Hotmail messages direct to your mobile phone
> > http://www.msn.co.uk/msnmobile
> >
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to v3toolstaskforce as:
> geoffry_roberts@fastmail.fm
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> leave-v3toolstaskforce-129070A@lists.hl7.org
|
|
|
| Re: Eclipse 2.1.2 and CVS Much Grief [message #125673 is a reply to message #125541] |
Tue, 09 December 2003 14:47  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: eclipse-user.jibeinc.com
Geoffry Roberts wrote:
> I am forwarding this e-mail to the this list in an attempt to
> troubleshoot the following problems. I am epecially concerned with the
> first of these issues.
>
> These discussed in the message below are located in the UK and are using
> eclipse 2.1.2 and 2.1.1 to access a cvs repository located in Ann Arbor,
> MI.
>
> I am the administrator of the cvs repository in question. I have never
> encountered any thing like the following.
>
> Taken from the message below:
>
>>...we had the opportunity on two occasions to see
>>this real[ly] was a technical issue by seeing two machines (different
>>logons) both connected to the same repository. Both refreshed and both
>>showing and downloading different versions...
>
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>>Laura,
>>
>>Here is my contribution on the woes of using CVS is a real time critical
>>project.
>>
>>I have seen clear evidence of both the first issue identified by Kevin -
>>version inconsistency. This has cost the project many hours of
>>development work and substantial elapsed time on the final deliverables
>>due to people working on out of date copies. [snip]
I don't have the magic answer for you, but I'd like to point out for
your sake that CVS is a very mature, stable product. It has been around
since the 1980's (longer than or as long as most of its commercial
competitors). CVS is successfully used for VERY large, VERY distributed
projects. The highest-profile of these being Linux, Apache (*all* of
Apache's numerous projects use CVS, not just the famous web server),
Mozilla, thousands of SourceForge projects, etc.
The first two sentences of this person's "report" above give a good
indication about their attitude. It is not one of trying to solve the
problems; instead it is head-nodding in agreement with pre-conceived
notions about open-source software. That much is clear.
Users (even developer users) who look to blame products before assuming
they are doing something or configuring something incorrectly are very
difficult to deal with and satisfy - I'm sorry for you to have to deal
such people.
That said, is there any other type of traffic going on between these two
sites, or is it just CVS traffic? It would be telling to determine if
other types of chatty, frequent traffic can be sustained between them -
it may be an infrastructure issue.
Also, do the logs on the CVS server tell you anything about connection
problems, dropped connections, errors, etc. Can you set up a web
browsing system so users at the remote site can browse the repository
without using a local CVS client? That might tell you something.
As for getting incorrect version - well all I can say is that do these
users really think CVS would have bugs of that nature, where it simply
gave the wrong results? Do they think no-one would have noticed by now
if it did? Are they willing to help by carefully reproducing and
documenting all conditions where this appears to be happening? Or are
they more interested in lodging general complaints that reinforce
presuppositions about CVS and open source?
Sorry for the soapbox stance, but that kind of attitude is not helping
our industry, and it just plain pisses me off. Hopefully I have
mis-interpreted the messages and the people involved are more reasonable
than I'm giving them credit for at the moment.
HTH,
Eric
--
Eric Rizzo
Software Architect
Jibe, Inc.
http://www.jibeinc.com
|
|
|
| Re: Eclipse 2.1.2 and CVS Much Grief [message #125761 is a reply to message #125673] |
Wed, 10 December 2003 01:16 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Ihad been having the same problem below. While trying to synchronize VE-ALL
module. Eclipse gives me
a time-out error if I try all module projects in one shot.
OBS: I just tested again and it worked fine. Maybe it would be a stressed
time of the CVS server? too many connections and it set a lower time-out?
Emerson Cargnin
http://echofloripa.sytes.net
> I have also had several instances of the second type of issue where the
> connection drops for large updates. However, in my case this was
> associated on four separated occassions with "damage" to my in-house
> network and router requiring it to be reset before I could see the world
> again. Again you could question if this is a result of CVS or Eclipse or
> just something in my system. However, I would simply say I had this
> problem ONLY when using Ecliplse and CVS and the first I knew of the
> error each time was a CVS fail. Thereafter email and http failed across
> my entire network (of five computers) and reset of the router was the
> way I restored it. First time it took sometime to track this down as the
> solution - after that at least I knew how to fix it in five minutes! In
> the meantime I have been communicating repeatedly by http, email and ftp
> with no other failures. Thus the evidence points fairly and squarely at
> CVS/Eclipse.
"Eric Rizzo" <eclipse-user@jibeinc.com> escreveu na mensagem
news:br58q6$pfr$1@eclipse.org...
> Geoffry Roberts wrote:
>
> > I am forwarding this e-mail to the this list in an attempt to
> > troubleshoot the following problems. I am epecially concerned with the
> > first of these issues.
> >
> > These discussed in the message below are located in the UK and are using
> > eclipse 2.1.2 and 2.1.1 to access a cvs repository located in Ann Arbor,
> > MI.
> >
> > I am the administrator of the cvs repository in question. I have never
> > encountered any thing like the following.
> >
> > Taken from the message below:
> >
> >>...we had the opportunity on two occasions to see
> >>this real[ly] was a technical issue by seeing two machines (different
> >>logons) both connected to the same repository. Both refreshed and both
> >>showing and downloading different versions...
> >
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> >>Laura,
> >>
> >>Here is my contribution on the woes of using CVS is a real time critical
> >>project.
> >>
> >>I have seen clear evidence of both the first issue identified by Kevin -
> >>version inconsistency. This has cost the project many hours of
> >>development work and substantial elapsed time on the final deliverables
> >>due to people working on out of date copies. [snip]
>
> I don't have the magic answer for you, but I'd like to point out for
> your sake that CVS is a very mature, stable product. It has been around
> since the 1980's (longer than or as long as most of its commercial
> competitors). CVS is successfully used for VERY large, VERY distributed
> projects. The highest-profile of these being Linux, Apache (*all* of
> Apache's numerous projects use CVS, not just the famous web server),
> Mozilla, thousands of SourceForge projects, etc.
>
> The first two sentences of this person's "report" above give a good
> indication about their attitude. It is not one of trying to solve the
> problems; instead it is head-nodding in agreement with pre-conceived
> notions about open-source software. That much is clear.
> Users (even developer users) who look to blame products before assuming
> they are doing something or configuring something incorrectly are very
> difficult to deal with and satisfy - I'm sorry for you to have to deal
> such people.
>
> That said, is there any other type of traffic going on between these two
> sites, or is it just CVS traffic? It would be telling to determine if
> other types of chatty, frequent traffic can be sustained between them -
> it may be an infrastructure issue.
> Also, do the logs on the CVS server tell you anything about connection
> problems, dropped connections, errors, etc. Can you set up a web
> browsing system so users at the remote site can browse the repository
> without using a local CVS client? That might tell you something.
>
> As for getting incorrect version - well all I can say is that do these
> users really think CVS would have bugs of that nature, where it simply
> gave the wrong results? Do they think no-one would have noticed by now
> if it did? Are they willing to help by carefully reproducing and
> documenting all conditions where this appears to be happening? Or are
> they more interested in lodging general complaints that reinforce
> presuppositions about CVS and open source?
>
> Sorry for the soapbox stance, but that kind of attitude is not helping
> our industry, and it just plain pisses me off. Hopefully I have
> mis-interpreted the messages and the people involved are more reasonable
> than I'm giving them credit for at the moment.
>
> HTH,
> Eric
> --
> Eric Rizzo
> Software Architect
> Jibe, Inc.
> http://www.jibeinc.com
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 6/12/2003
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Jun 22 08:27:36 EDT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.07071 seconds |
Home