Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Moving from Subversion to Mercurial - how to adapt the workflow and staging/integration systems? - Stack Overflow
Moving from Subversion to Mercurial - how to adapt the workflow and staging/integration systems? - Stack Overflow: "We got all psyched about from from svn to hg and as the development workflow is more or less flushed out, here remains the most difficult part - staging and integration system."
Mercurial hg, am I doing it right? - Stack Overflow
Mercurial hg, am I doing it right? - Stack Overflow: "Remember, merging is coding too -- the person doing the merge is making choices about what should and shouldn't be. The QA people might be capable of it, but it's the developer's job. Also, why do it twice? The usual handoff for this is something like 'QA, pull revision 897a9d9f9a7 and test please -- the developers'. If you want to get fancy you can have a tag like 'readyforQA' that the developers move along the 'default' branch as they go (in this example they'd hg tag after their steps 3 and 5 and let QA know there's new stuff to pull.
The one piece of advice I'd give you is don't try to over-engineer the process. DVCSs lead to a sort-of haphazard way of working, that's a little scary at first, but tends to work out. YOu'll find sub-teams and pairs of folks have clones you never knew about and in the end so long as you have a few firm rules like 'nothing goes to production without first passing through QA' the rest sort of works itself out."
The one piece of advice I'd give you is don't try to over-engineer the process. DVCSs lead to a sort-of haphazard way of working, that's a little scary at first, but tends to work out. YOu'll find sub-teams and pairs of folks have clones you never knew about and in the end so long as you have a few firm rules like 'nothing goes to production without first passing through QA' the rest sort of works itself out."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)