Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday
...I use version control all the time on projects where I'm the only one working.
|
Ah, but you're talking about managing
multiple projects. I'm not.
Quote:
|
Just out of curiousity, have you played around with using CVS or Subversion?
|
I use formal version control regularly. For my day job about fifteen years ago, I actually
implemented a high-level version control and release/distribution system based on the old Polytron VCS tool with a database-connected wrapper. When you've got more than one program being worked on, a real version control tool helps a lot -- and when you're dealing with hundreds of programs, it becomes essential.
But when there is
only one program being worked on, I'll stick with my opinion that it's unneccessary. Like the robot itself, the control software is a one-off thing with a very limited lifetime. Documentation and structure are always important, but as long as it's a single project under the control of one person (or two working closely together), formal change management is an added layer of complexity that only pays off in the very long term.
If we had several parallel development paths going on, or if we needed to maintain multiple years' worth of robot software, then I'd agree that a "real" VCS would be worth the minor extra complexity for each project. In fact, with the network and file server system we're about to put together for our team's use, we'll probably find ourselves wanting to manage multiple projects soon, and I'll embrace a formal version control system for that situation. Until then, however, I really don't think there's anything a CVS "check in" provides that a drag-and-drop "copy and rename" of the lone software folder doesn't give us. On the other hand, having separate folders for each day's work actually makes it easier to do offsite backups (on flash drive or floppy disk), and to use any random team's computer to do development in an emergency.