|
The absolute minimum is to keep a copy of the code that went into each release. Duplicate those copies to give you a place to do continued work, for example one copy to do bugfixes to the current product, another for the new development that goes into the next release. Revision control systems give you the ability to create these copies virtually so you don't have the mess of full copies of the code lying around.
At a minimum, you want to be able to put out bugfix releases while you're still in the middle of adding and debugging the new features for the next major release, so you need three copies (one to archive the code that was in the code of the actual release).
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
ravikhoda wrote: there may be new plugins/ functionality will be added to the product which may be separate module or may be interconnected with existing modules.
You need to decide exactly what that means.
Specifically is a "plugin" going to be treated as a separate deliverable or will they always be part of the original product.
An alternative way to think of this is if your "product" is on version 2.1.3 will Plugin XXX be version 2.1.3 or can it be 15.8.16?
If it is a separate deliverable then that impacts your layout and can also impact your choice of version control.
|
|
|
|
|
"Report turns 'Comfortably Positioned' to 'Trendy'!"(7)
Not too hard but you may have to think for a bit.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
Probably not the answer you want but:
Banging - can mean trendy
Report - bang
ING - are comfortably positioned in the banking world.
|
|
|
|
|
Not a proper CCC I know, but you do get two for the price of one
Macerating food in stomach is confusing wildebeest with one less very slow beast
|
|
|
|
|
Remodeled snub in received stolen piece maybe? (7)
|
|
|
|
|
Snub? are you sure?
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
It seemed relevant at the time. At least it was better than this unfinished one:
finally feeling you can guess which two lost
|
|
|
|
|
Snub looks good to me. Though I think I should be fired for not seeing the answer sooner.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't take it literally, perhaps I had another meaning in mind
|
|
|
|
|
Tom, STOP teasing the rest of us! What is the answer? I've tried everything I can think of and after yesterday's success (alone and without a leader) I thought I was on a roll, until today.
If there is one thing more dangerous than getting between a bear and her cubs it's getting between my wife and her chocolate.
|
|
|
|
|
The answer is Gunshot - snug backwards plus hot,
or shun rearranged in got.
|
|
|
|
|
This system[^] can generate more revenue by converting this into a reality TV show
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
There are people ready to PAY! fro UK visa?
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Why not? The US have a green card lottery. At least this way there may be some revenue and we get some extra rich people to not pay any taxes.
|
|
|
|
|
Some terrorists are wealthy. Just what we need.
If there is one thing more dangerous than getting between a bear and her cubs it's getting between my wife and her chocolate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Given the choice, I think I know what I'd choose.
If there is one thing more dangerous than getting between a bear and her cubs it's getting between my wife and her chocolate.
|
|
|
|
|
Right! Mr Jihad every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, the U.S. has a green card lottery, but certain 'well represented ethnic groups' are excluded. So, it is a lottery for the poor, huddled masses only.
|
|
|
|
|
Money gets you in the door? How Swiss of you!
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
This is not Programming question. Though wasn't sure which forum to asks this question. Tried Google too, but probably couldn't formulate search keywords correctly and couldn't find anything in particular.
If this forum is not appropriate, I would appreciate if someone can direct to right forum rather than having a go on it
In Enhancement kind of project, we often encountered situation where more than one tasks are deployed and sent for UAT. And for some reason one or more task either rejected or put on hold.
I am sure many of us may have encountered this situation. My question was: What is general practice? Do we go ahead to production with approved tasks? If yes, do we go through the whole cycle of Deploy to QA (after removing the rejected task), Functional testing and UAT? Or any other route?
Any further guidance on right articles/discussions would help
Thanks,
Milind
|
|
|
|
|
IMO: This is the correct forum for this type questions.
OK, so my answer is - It depends.
- If this tasks are related to individual modules of a larger project, then Yes you should move the tasks/parts to production that are approved in the UAT environment (We have followed this same practice when we were customizing an Oracle ERP). i.e. if CRM Module is ready then we will push it and not wait for the HR Module to get approved.
- But if the project is smaller and the modules are very tightly integrated. You should wait for every module for that particular Version number to get approved in the UAT. (We are currently following this practice for our cloud based software) i.e. If we are going to launch Version 1.5, everything related to 1.5 must be approved in the Test Environment.
So again, it depends whether you are maintaining a single version for the application or separate version for separate modules/parts.
Also one more thing I mostly do not follow "best practice", I just follow whatever is suitable for my current scenario.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Rutvik.
I am leading both project and support group and we encounter this scenario quite often. So, We have staging code-base which is in sync with staging version control and then we are forced to go live sans one task . Sometimes the code is from different component and sometimes from one service for example and we are in fix. Normally, we try to hold back the release but at times we have to bow to customer's wish and re-build/re-test hastily and VSS 2005 is not very supportive in such case.
Thanks,
Milind
|
|
|
|
|
MT_ wrote: This is not Programming question. Though wasn't sure which forum to asks this question. Tried Google too, but probably couldn't formulate search keywords correctly and couldn't find anything in particular.
If this forum is not appropriate, I would appreciate if someone can direct to right forum rather than having a go on it
Look where the Lounge wrath has brought us : now you have to write a disclaimer not to be flamed... I miss the time when you simply could post in the wrong forum, and your post would be moved in minutes without anyone making a fuss about it...
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Do not feed the troll ! - Common proverb
modified 26-Feb-14 3:46am.
|
|
|
|