Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hp-cv!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!qiclab.scn.rain.com!slc.com!servio!servio!aland
From: aland@servio.slc.com (Alan Darlington)
Subject: Re: Source code/Repository management
Message-ID: <1996Jan12.185246.4281@slc.com>
Sender: news@slc.com (USENET News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: servio
Organization: GemStone Systems, Inc., Beaverton OR, USA
References: <DKD879.J5L@ritz.mordor.com> <4cmdnb$b5t@ixnews6.ix.netcom.com> <30F2DF1D.4D57@hyeena.jyu.fi>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 18:52:46 GMT
Lines: 26

Steven Kelly <stevek@hyeena.jyu.fi> writes:
> Michael Latta wrote:
> > 
> > In <DKD879.J5L@ritz.mordor.com> jpletzke@ritz.mordor.com (Jonathan
> > Pletzke) writes:
<snip>  
> > >2. A regular re-build of the entire system from source should be done.
> > 
> > Always, unless you use Envy in which case you build from source only
> > for the production builds.
>
> We have also had good success with patches or difference files. If there
> are things that can go wrong in a build other than bad source (e.g. 
> setting up initial globals, stripping etc.) then rebuilding from scratch
> can be riskier than patching an existing build. About 5 sets of patches
> seems to be a maximum for us, and then we rebuild.
<snip>

Of course rebuilding is riskier - but the real question is WHEN do you
want to deal with the problems?  Now, when the changes are fresh in
everyone's minds, or several months down the road, when nobody will
know what is going on?  (Needless to say, I support rebuilding from
scratch very frequently :-).

  Cheers,
  Alan
