Timeline for Is committing/checking in code everyday a good practice?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 6, 2012 at 13:43 | comment | added | S.Robins | +1. I once worked in a team where we had to check code into the vcs every day, even if the code was a spike or a useless investigation. It proved inefficient and wasteful, particularly because it required periodic maintenance to clean the vcs up. It was a due to combination of paranoia over potentially risking losing a little time to redo something, and because the manager had read in a book that you should commit every day. An extreme example perhaps, but seriously, if you haven't the judgement to know whether it's "worth" checking something in, you're probably not well suited to the job. | |
| Jul 6, 2012 at 9:54 | comment | added | Giorgio | "What do you mean 'worth checking in'? If it doesn't break anyone else's code, why wouldn't you check it in? ": because I do not want to keep old copies of the code just because they existed at some point in time. I want too keep an old copy of the code if it contains some useful information that I might want to retrieve in the future. Otherwise I am just producing useless noise in the revision history. | |
| Jul 6, 2012 at 3:05 | comment | added | Kirk Broadhurst | What do you mean 'worth checking in'? If it doesn't break anyone else's code, why wouldn't you check it in? | |
| Jul 6, 2012 at 1:32 | comment | added | Vincent B. | Then if it is complex feature integration/development, it is still a big loss not to commit it, maybe not to the trunk, but at least in a branch for this feature, that's what branches are for ! | |
| Jul 5, 2012 at 20:18 | history | answered | Mason Wheeler | CC BY-SA 3.0 |