Taking the plunge...
Johan Samyn
johan.samyn at gmail.com
Sat Dec 3 23:24:04 UTC 2011
Steve,
Are you using the Progress AppBuilder for the GUI ?
Johan
On 03-12-2011 20:26, Steve Dyer wrote:
>
> Hi, I am looking into migrating my development teams over to the
> wonders of Mercurial, but have many questions running through my head
> about how to achieve this, or even whether Mercurial is the right tool.
>
> We are a Progress development house (www.progress.com for those who
> haven't heard of Progress......probably everyone!), and currently use
> a vendor sourced SCM called Roundtable. Roundtable is written in, and
> promoted by Progress so that is why we have it. It also comes in at
> about £2k per developer, plus an annual maintenance/support package.
> It is very rigid, and very strict, but to be fair has served us well.
> However massive growth and cent offshoring/cosourcing of development
> has meant we need to start looking down a different path......thus
> Mercurial.
>
> I have done a lot of reading,and a lot of investigation around a
> variety of tools, and in fact in my distant past I was a user of SVN,
> so some of the concepts of Mercurial aren't new to me. Recently I
> have focused my research into GIT and Mercurial, and for, in part,
> political reasons, Mercurial has now been thrust to the top of the list.
>
> My first task really was to work out a suitable SCM strategy, and
> supporting developer/release work flows. I stumbled across a very
> good article on this very idea, which although focused on GIT, the
> concepts are perfect for how we work, and from the posts on that
> article this can work with Mercurial too. My problem is I can't
> visualise how exactly, day to day, Mercurial fits into this strategy.
> The article is here
> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>
> My question(s) really is, how would one go about working with a
> strategy like this? Where this article refers to branching (feature
> branch, release branch etc) would they be clones in Mercurial land??
>
> Of course that strategy there may not be the best approach, so if
> anyone can point me to some better examples of Mercurial usage that
> would be great. We currently have around 30 developers, some based in
> the same office, some offshore and some offsite. Our code base is
> some 10,0000 files amounting to about 1gig at a guess. It's worth
> mentioning too that this application serves 6 businesses in effect.
> Each business is an internationals variant or like a franchise of our
> uk business. As a result we have currently a single core codebase,
> and this then feeds into 6 sub code bases. The main reason for this
> is economy of scale for our sub businesses, and it gives us the
> ability to feed functionality etc developed for one business out to
> our others. So our code base currently looks a little like this
> hierarchically :
>
> Level 1 : Dev
> Level 2 : TestSpain TestFrance TestUSA TestItaly
> Level 3 : ProdSpain ProdFrance ProdUSA ProdItaly
>
> So dev feeds into 6, and then each of those feeds into the appropriate
> Prod. Then within the code itself we have switches etc to say "IF
> Business is France THEN DO....". Not white that crude, but you get
> the idea.
>
> Anyway, that's a bit of brain dump, so apologies but I wanted to sort
> of put that out there in the hope that I can prompt some Mercurial
> gods to see it and go "hey that's easy, you need to do this....", or
> at least say "nah, you should go and read this before posting that on
> here"
>
> Many thanks for at least reading all that and getting this far down
> before deleting!
>
> Steve
>
>
> *** This email has been scanned by HomeServe's MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ***
>
> This e-mail and its attachments are strictly confidential. If you are
> not the intended recipient please delete the e-mail (including
> attachments) from your system without printing copying disclosing or
> otherwise using its contents. If you have received this e-mail in
> error please notify us immediately by e-mail or telephone on 0845 149
> 8000. Any e-mails sent in an employee's personal capacity are not sent
> on behalf of us and are the personal responsibility of the sender.
>
> Whilst we make every effort to ensure that this e-mail is free from
> viruses this cannot be guaranteed. We therefore recommend that you
> scan all e-mails with appropriate virus checking software.
>
> Homeserve plc is registered under company number 2648297. Homeserve
> Claims Management Limited is registered under company number 3913960.
> Homeserve Membership Limited is registered under company number 2770612.
>
> All the above companies are registered in England, and each has its
> registered office at Cable Drive, Walsall, WS2 7BN.
>
> Homeserve Membership Limited is authorised and regulated by the
> Financial Services Authority under registration number 312518.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
--
Johan Samyn
_______________________________________________________________
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add,
but when there is nothing left to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20111204/675ad6a2/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Mercurial
mailing list