[cvsnt] Re: Source Control Best Practices?

John Peacock jpeacock at rowman.com
Mon Dec 6 17:44:56 GMT 2004

Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.

Merrill Cornish wrote:

> One poster implied that all their developers were working on
> "private" branches, even though they were all working on the same
> code.  The purpose of the branch is to provide isolation when
> alterate code developerment paths must be maintained.  However,
> having _normal_ development be done only on branches assures that
> each developer is working in needless (and potentially debilitating)
> isolation.

This is a good example of "subjective" since your assertions are at odds 
with numerous development models.  One of the other link that was posted:


specifically discusses how to manage _all_ development on branches (both 
the Dovetail and Flying Fish models).  It has some limitations for the 
developer, but there are legitimate reasons to use these models.  Your 
belief that branches are for alternate paths is not the only way to 
approach branching development.  Since CVSNT has strong mergepoint 
support, it's actually much easier to develop this way (perhaps you are 
more used to the limitations with conventional CVS).


More information about the cvsnt mailing list
Download the latest CVSNT, TortosieCVS, WinCVS etc. for Windows 8 etc.
@CVSNT on Twitter   CVSNT on Facebook