http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=552495


in reply to Re^4: Professional development with Perl - how it's done?
in thread Professional development with Perl - how it's done?

I use SVK - while better than SVN,

Incompatible changes still have to be merged by hand. Some CPAN modules may change a couple lines a release. Then, there's modules like DBM::Deep that will add and remove whole files and those that stay will be significantly changed, even though the API and behavior that you care about hasn't changed at all.


My criteria for good software:
  1. Does it work?
  2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?
  • Comment on Re^5: Professional development with Perl - how it's done?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Professional development with Perl - how it's done?
by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jun 13, 2006 at 12:01 UTC
    that's not saying much

    Well personally I think svk's merge support is significantly better than SVNs. I find the trivial handling of mirrors and remote branches/merges a joy.

    it still has issues

    Yup... I do hit snags occasionally. Very occasionally though.

    Incompatible changes still have to be merged by hand.

    True - but that's always going to be necessary.

    Some CPAN modules may change a couple lines a release. Then, there's modules like DBM::Deep that will add and remove whole files and those that stay will be significantly changed, even though the API and behavior that you care about hasn't changed at all.

    All true - and I still prefer to have all the dependencies for my build in source control so I can figure out those changes if/when they cause problems.