Newbie question - multiple head prevention

[Tony Zakula]

I am kind of slow, so excuse me.  Are you saying that you would do it
the way I have it setup?  Or just have the paths in the code point to
the production server? (Which I personally do not like, but)

Another route I considered was storing the images in the database, but
that has its own set of issues, and I prefer not to go there.

I could make the designers use source control, but that could be a
bigger headache.

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 1:58 PM, David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b at dd-b.net> wrote:
>
> On Tue, June 8, 2010 12:31, Michael Diamond wrote:
>> Tony,
>>
>> I would be inclined to make these two separate repositories.  You're
>> looking
>> at two almost completely unrelated workflows, and I would be inclined to
>> either:
>> 1. Just .hgignore the image directory - this may not be acceptable for
>> your
>> use case, but I find just keeping backups of the site makes more sense for
>> binary files like images than checking them into a repository.
>
> Depends on what you're doing, but in my experience working on web sites,
> matching the image versions to the code versions is absolutely necessary.
> The details and how they're broken up and sizes will change in the course
> of development, and getting the wrong images for the code will look
> HORRIBLE, clearly broken.
>
> (A scheme where you changed the file name, maybe by appending a version,
> and kept that set of file names in a fixed location accessible to all, and
> didn't put them in source control, could be made to work; the references
> from the code would then always point to the right names, whichever
> version you updated to.)
> --
> David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b at dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/
> Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
> Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
> Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>