I am letting some people use my public beta system written in EWB, and aim to work
on new features on my dev PC. Therefore I need to think about version control. It
strikes me that this should be easy, with just having a folder for the original,
and another for the new. I could deploy either to the test build location, and then
choose to upload later.

Anyone see any flaws with this simple arrangement?

/Matthew Jones/

Matthew,

<< I am letting some people use my public beta system written in EWB, and
aim to work on new features on my dev PC. Therefore I need to think about
version control. It strikes me that this should be easy, with just having a
folder for the original, and another for the new. I could deploy either to
the test build location, and then choose to upload later.

Anyone see any flaws with this simple arrangement? >>

None from here.

Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

<< I am letting some people use my public beta system written in EWB, and aim to work
on new features on my dev PC. Therefore I need to think about version control. >>

I'm not wanting to start a debate/flame war about version control systems but I use Mercurial for my EWB projects (as well as my Delphi, PHP, web design and graphic design projects, and documents).  It's folder based and very simple to use.

Regards,

Steve

<Steve Gill> wrote:
> I'm not wanting to start a debate/flame war about version control systems
> but I use Mercurial for my EWB projects (as well as my Delphi, PHP, web
> design and graphic design projects, and documents).  It's folder based
> and very simple to use.

Thanks, I use Subversion (long time user) for actual source control, but
this is more wanting to be able to roll out a minor fix while I've got the
development code all torn apart. I'd certainly agree that some sort of
source control is important.

--
Matthew Jones

>
> Anyone see any flaws with this simple arrangement?

Something similar here.

I have one file with global settings which are changed based on
"hostname" / "computername". So I have exactly the same files on my
local dev computer, one on my test domain (beta.mydomain.com) and on
my productive system (www.mydomain.com).

My local dev files I keep in subversion as well and use Beyond Compare
to sync to public servers (beta and productive).

A nice option in EWB would be, if only the "deploy" function would
create compressed javascript. Like this I can debug with chrome and
when I'm done, I deployed the comressed version without changing the
settings.

cu Christian

> A nice option in EWB would be, if only the "deploy" function would
> create compressed javascript. Like this I can debug with chrome and
> when I'm done, I deployed the comressed version without changing the
> settings.

An interesting thought, but I'd vary it as my situation is different. My code is
written to stop itself working on http as I want to ensure https. Thus deploy is
always used (and the compile before deploy option would be nice to see). But I was
thinking how nice a pair of compile buttons would be, one for normal and one
compressed.

All we need then is four buttons to cover all options. 8-)

More likely, I think making the compress option a toolbar button to save going into
the project dialog would be better, or indeed the command line option to choose.

/Matthew Jones/

Hi Matthew,

<< Thanks, I use Subversion (long time user) for actual source control, but
this is more wanting to be able to roll out a minor fix while I've got the
development code all torn apart. I'd certainly agree that some sort of
source control is important.  >>

The reason I mentioned Mercurial is that I use it to do something similar to what you said.  I just use the Clone command to clone the original folder and then work on the code in the cloned folder to do the fix without disturbing the original code.  I can then deploy from either folder.

Regards,

Steve

> The reason I mentioned Mercurial is that I use it to do something
> similar to what you said.  I just use the Clone command to clone
> the original folder and then work on the code in the cloned folder
> to do the fix without disturbing the original code.  I can then
> deploy from either folder.

Ah right, yes, good thinking. I should use the SVN options to do a branch. Better
choice. I will do that.

/Matthew Jones/

Christian,

<< A nice option in EWB would be, if only the "deploy" function would create
compressed javascript. Like this I can debug with chrome and when I'm done,
I deployed the comressed version without changing the settings. >>

Good idea.  I'm definitely going to, at the very least, make it so that you
can toggle the compression setting for compilation a lot easier from the
project manager.  It's a real pain to have to go into the Project Options
each time.

Thanks,

Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com