|
A supreme genius of flamenco guitar, who became equally at home in jazz and world-music, born Francisco Sanchez Gomez, whose creativity knew no bounds, died in Mexico, age 66, reportedly while playing with his children, from a heart attack [^].
![Rose | [Rose]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
“The best hope is that one of these days the Ground will get disgusted enough just to walk away ~ leaving people with nothing more to stand ON than what they have so bloody well stood FOR up to now.” Kenneth Patchen, Poet
|
|
|
|
|
Oh what we've lose with his death, he was the best guitarist I've ever heard. I'm really sad to hear this bad news.
R.I.P. Guitar genius, we'll never forget you 
|
|
|
|
|
Oh! I loved his play...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Great Hole in the Art World... We`ll miss Paco
|
|
|
|
|
Does that make him a Great Arthole?
|
|
|
|
|
Well, it's a side effect, but...
http://what-if.xkcd.com/85/[^]
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Meh, it fails to take in the co-efficient of restitution and the players handicap.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
And then we could go to the moon again fake another moon landing.
|
|
|
|
|
No, you'd be able to see a bag o' balls that big with the naked eye, never mind binoculars! 
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
So... many... lines... must... not... comment...
|
|
|
|
|
HI all,
one of our client going to launch a 1.0 version of a product in the market in near future. as we are new with maintaining a version of a product i would like to know the best practice to take care about that. there may be new plugins/ functionality will be added to the product which may be separate module or may be interconnected with existing modules.
i want to know the best practice to maintain this, from document level to code level or something else as well.
Ravi Khoda
|
|
|
|
|
What you are talking about is release management and that's a much bigger topic than would fit in a single lounge response. To be honest, you should have been thinking about release management all along because it affects things such as source branching strategies, testing strategies, application architecture, regression paths, versioning, serialization - the list of things it encompasses is huge.
|
|
|
|
|
Alright thanks for your reply. i got a lot of new keywords to google and check about them. will do some more research on that.
Thanks
Ravi Khoda
|
|
|
|
|
Firstly, get thee to a repository. Use whatever you like, but use one.
Now use a file structure with head - the current head revision, development - branched off a version, and branch - holding each release.
This structure I've used successfully:
product
+- branch
| +- v1.0
| | <branched from head for build of version 1.0 and it's sub versions.>
| +- v1.0.1
| | <branched from v1.0 for build of patches to 1.0.1>
| +- v1.1
| | <branched from head for build of version 1.1 and it's sub versions.>
| <etc>
+- user
| +- <user>
| <branched from where the user is working>
+- head
| +- documents
| | <documents at the head revision
| +- source
| <source at the head revision
+- work
<any non version related files>
For any major piece of work, branch to a user area and on completion integrate back. Integration to the branch lines is only for release and there should be no development there.
Then have an automated build process that can pull down any line, say product\head or product\branch\v1.0, build it and package it. As a super bonus, have the build process put on the version stamps to the files [left as an exercise for the reader].
This structure means you can patch any or all versions of the code and manage your code safely. But no one wants to reduce the risk do they?
|
|
|
|
|
alright something new for me but will give it a go. my project is in asp.net should i go with SVN or Visual Source Safe as version tool.?
Ravi Khoda
|
|
|
|
|
I purposefully did not use the phrase version tool or recommend any particular repository. There are many factors that go into choosing a scheme and with the information you give it is hard to say which is better for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Alright will check that. thanks for your time and suggetions. 
Ravi Khoda
|
|
|
|
|
Branching is evil and is a sign of a flawed process.
This space intentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
|
Ooh! Ooh! Holy War! 
And what, pray tell, is evil about branching off at the point you build a product so that it can be easily be maintained separately or in parallel to the head revision?
TBH I have worked with various repository structures and branch to release has always seemed the easiest and most sensible to me. But what would I know after a quarter century of hacking? 
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: a quarter century of hacking
In my quarter century I have never created a branch. In CMS (Code Management System for VMS) we used Classes, now in TFS we use Labels. If your tool doesn't support something like this (I'm looking at you Subversion) then you are using the wrong tool.
Nagy Vilmos wrote: the head revision
That is totally wrong-headed thinking, which is a curse of the "Branch" mentality imposed by inferior tools.
This space intentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
|
You can branch (to my way of thinking) if you have a legitimate branch in custom business software. A customer wants something and will from thence forth essentially have a separate product that must be maintained, hopefully using libraries to not be totally a new animal.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: Branching is evil and is a sign of a flawed process.
How do you do an emergency fix of an existing production application?
|
|
|
|
|
He doesn't. He changes his name and moves city to avoid them.
|
|
|
|
|
That depends on the nature of the problem. It's never been an issue.
This space intentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
