FAQ
Hello,

I have written an add-on script for the `Revision Control System' (RCS)
package. For more information about its functionality, see the README part
below.

I would suggest the following script categories

Version Control
Software Configuration Management
Software Development


From the README:
----------------
rcsfreeze.pl is a perl script to freeze a configuration of
sources checked in under RCS.

This perl script is a complete rewrite of the rcsfreeze.sh shell
script contained in the RCS package with its RCS ID:
$Id: rcsfreeze.sh,v 4.6 1993/11/03 17:42:27 eggert Exp $.
The major differences between the shell script and the perl
script are the following:
the input argument "symb revision number"
- is optional for the shell script. Internally an unique
revision number is used.
- is mandatory for the perl script. Only this symbolic
revision number is used.
the log message
- is saved by the shell script in its own file
rcsfreeze.log. But there are no tools available to
retrieve the log messages for a given revision number.
- is saved by the perl script amongst the other RCS log
messages. Therefore they can be retrieved with the
appropriate rlog command.


I am looking forward to your comments.

Norbert
--
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
Norbert E. Gruener E-mail: nog@MPA-Garching.MPG.DE |
MPI fuer Astrophysik PGP encrypted mail preferred |
WWW: http://www.MPA-Garching.MPG.DE/~nog/ |
PGPprint(RSA): 66 64 C0 D0 6F 1A 16 02 C2 C6 37 83 3A 5F 88 9B |
PGPprint(DH): EBBF 02ED 1B91 39C3 5FB9 4D2F 9478 E224 334C 34CD |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+

Search Discussions

  • Norbert Gruener at Sep 28, 1999 at 5:55 am
    Hello,

    I have written an add-on script for the `Revision Control System' (RCS)
    package. For more information about its functionality, see the README part
    below.

    I would suggest the following script categories

    Version Control
    Software Configuration Management
    Software Development


    From the README:
    ----------------
    rcsfreeze.pl is a perl script to freeze a configuration of
    sources checked in under RCS.

    This perl script is a complete rewrite of the rcsfreeze.sh shell
    script contained in the RCS package with its RCS ID:
    $Id: rcsfreeze.sh,v 4.6 1993/11/03 17:42:27 eggert Exp $.
    The major differences between the shell script and the perl
    script are the following:
    the input argument "symb revision number"
    - is optional for the shell script. Internally an unique
    revision number is used.
    - is mandatory for the perl script. Only this symbolic
    revision number is used.
    the log message
    - is saved by the shell script in its own file
    rcsfreeze.log. But there are no tools available to
    retrieve the log messages for a given revision number.
    - is saved by the perl script amongst the other RCS log
    messages. Therefore they can be retrieved with the
    appropriate rlog command.


    I am looking forward to your comments.

    Norbert
    --
    +------------------------------------------------------------------+
    Norbert E. Gruener E-mail: nog@MPA-Garching.MPG.DE |
    MPI fuer Astrophysik PGP encrypted mail preferred |
    WWW: http://www.MPA-Garching.MPG.DE/~nog/ |
    PGPprint(RSA): 66 64 C0 D0 6F 1A 16 02 C2 C6 37 83 3A 5F 88 9B |
    PGPprint(DH): EBBF 02ED 1B91 39C3 5FB9 4D2F 9478 E224 334C 34CD |
    +------------------------------------------------------------------+
  • Norbert Gruener at Oct 1, 1999 at 8:01 am
    Dear all,

    on Sept 17th and on Sept 28th, I have sent a query to this mailing list
    about the classification for my perl script. But I never got any reply :-(

    Did I anything wrong ??? I would appreciate any information.

    Thank you in advance.

    Norbert Gruener
    --
    +------------------------------------------------------------------+
    Norbert E. Gruener E-mail: nog@MPA-Garching.MPG.DE |
    MPI fuer Astrophysik PGP encrypted mail preferred |
    WWW: http://www.MPA-Garching.MPG.DE/~nog/ |
    PGPprint(RSA): 66 64 C0 D0 6F 1A 16 02 C2 C6 37 83 3A 5F 88 9B |
    PGPprint(DH): EBBF 02ED 1B91 39C3 5FB9 4D2F 9478 E224 334C 34CD |
    +------------------------------------------------------------------+
  • Norbert Gruener at Oct 1, 1999 at 8:48 am
    Hello,

    I have written an add-on script for the `Revision Control System' (RCS)
    package. For more information about its functionality, see the README part
    below.

    I would suggest the following script categories

    Version Control
    Software Configuration Management
    Software Development


    From the README:
    ----------------
    rcsfreeze.pl is a perl script to freeze a configuration of
    sources checked in under RCS.

    This perl script is a complete rewrite of the rcsfreeze.sh shell
    script contained in the RCS package with its RCS ID:
    $Id: rcsfreeze.sh,v 4.6 1993/11/03 17:42:27 eggert Exp $.
    The major differences between the shell script and the perl
    script are the following:
    the input argument "symb revision number"
    - is optional for the shell script. Internally an unique
    revision number is used.
    - is mandatory for the perl script. Only this symbolic
    revision number is used.
    the log message
    - is saved by the shell script in its own file
    rcsfreeze.log. But there are no tools available to
    retrieve the log messages for a given revision number.
    - is saved by the perl script amongst the other RCS log
    messages. Therefore they can be retrieved with the
    appropriate rlog command.


    I am looking forward to your comments.

    Norbert
    --
    +------------------------------------------------------------------+
    Norbert E. Gruener E-mail: nog@MPA-Garching.MPG.DE |
    MPI fuer Astrophysik PGP encrypted mail preferred |
    WWW: http://www.MPA-Garching.MPG.DE/~nog/ |
    PGPprint(RSA): 66 64 C0 D0 6F 1A 16 02 C2 C6 37 83 3A 5F 88 9B |
    PGPprint(DH): EBBF 02ED 1B91 39C3 5FB9 4D2F 9478 E224 334C 34CD |
    +------------------------------------------------------------------+
  • Rich Bowen at Oct 1, 1999 at 12:31 pm

    Norbert Gruener wrote:

    Hello,

    I have written an add-on script for the `Revision Control System' (RCS)
    package. For more information about its functionality, see the README part
    below.

    I would suggest the following script categories

    Version Control
    Software Configuration Management
    Software Development
    I vote for the broader "Software_Development" category.

    Rich
    --
    Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
    Lexington Perl Mongers - http://lexington.pm.org/
    PGP Key - http://www.rcbowen.com/pgp.txt
  • Robin Berjon at Oct 2, 1999 at 6:54 am

    At 08:30 01/10/1999 -0400, Rich Bowen wrote:
    Norbert Gruener wrote:
    I have written an add-on script for the `Revision Control System' (RCS)
    package. For more information about its functionality, see the README part
    below.

    I would suggest the following script categories

    Version Control
    Software Configuration Management
    Software Development
    I vote for the broader "Software_Development" category.
    Yes, or "Software_Development/Version_Control" ?


    .Robin
    Radioactive cats have 18 half-lives.
  • Kurt D. Starsinic at Oct 3, 1999 at 10:59 pm

    On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 02:55:57AM -0400, Robin Berjon wrote:
    At 08:30 01/10/1999 -0400, Rich Bowen wrote:
    Norbert Gruener wrote:
    I have written an add-on script for the `Revision Control System' (RCS)
    package. For more information about its functionality, see the README part
    below.

    I would suggest the following script categories

    Version Control
    Software Configuration Management
    Software Development
    I vote for the broader "Software_Development" category.
    Yes, or "Software_Development/Version_Control" ?
    I think that Version_Control is more suitable. People use RCS
    and other revision control systems for other things beside software.
    If there's strong feeling for putting it under a Software_Development
    hierarchy, then I would favor dual-categorization (e.g., Version_Control
    _and_ Software_Development/Version_Control).

    Peace,
    * Kurt Starsinic (Kurt.Starsinic@isinet.com) --------- Technical Specialist *
    `People keep pretending they can make things deeply |
    hierarchical, categorizable and sequential when they can't. |
    Everything is deeply intertwingled.' -- Ted Nelson |
    Institute for Scientific Information http://www.isinet.com/
  • David Coppit at Oct 4, 1999 at 12:16 am

    On Sun, 3 Oct 1999, Kurt D. Starsinic wrote:

    I vote for the broader "Software_Development" category.
    Yes, or "Software_Development/Version_Control" ?
    I think that Version_Control is more suitable. People use RCS
    and other revision control systems for other things beside software.
    If there's strong feeling for putting it under a Software_Development
    hierarchy, then I would favor dual-categorization (e.g., Version_Control
    _and_ Software_Development/Version_Control).
    Isn't "version control" exclusively an activity related to "software
    development"? Unless you think that there would be no other categories below
    software development? ;)

    David

    _________________________________________________________________________
    David Coppit - Graduate Student david@coppit.org
    The University of Virginia http://coppit.org/
    "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit has Brain." There was a long silence.
    "I suppose," said Pooh, "that that's why he never understands anything."
  • Ask Bjoern Hansen at Oct 4, 1999 at 12:36 am
    On Sun, 3 Oct 1999, David Coppit wrote:

    [..]
    If there's strong feeling for putting it under a Software_Development
    hierarchy, then I would favor dual-categorization (e.g., Version_Control
    _and_ Software_Development/Version_Control).
    Isn't "version control" exclusively an activity related to "software
    development"? Unless you think that there would be no other categories below
    software development? ;)
    No, here we use it for pretty much everything (of course software code,
    but also configuration files, database tables, installation scripts, etc
    etc). Actually, we even use CVS for some of our software distribution
    (among the servers, that is).


    - ask


    --
    ask bjoern hansen - <http://www.netcetera.dk/~ask/>
    more than 40M impressions per day, <http://valueclick.com>
  • Norbert Gruener at Oct 5, 1999 at 12:41 pm

    On Mon, Oct 04 1999, Kurt D. Starsinic wrote:
    On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 02:55:57AM -0400, Robin Berjon wrote:
    At 08:30 01/10/1999 -0400, Rich Bowen wrote:
    Norbert Gruener wrote:
    Version Control
    Software Configuration Management
    Software Development
    I vote for the broader "Software_Development" category.
    Yes, or "Software_Development/Version_Control" ?
    I think that Version_Control is more suitable. People use RCS
    and other revision control systems for other things beside software.
    If there's strong feeling for putting it under a Software_Development
    hierarchy, then I would favor dual-categorization (e.g., Version_Control
    _and_ Software_Development/Version_Control).
    Well, my first choice would be just "Version_Control" :-)

    Norbert
    --
    Ceterum censeo | PGP encrypted mail preferred.
    Redmondem delendam esse. | PGP Public Key at www.MPA-Garching.MPG.DE/~nog/
  • Norbert Gruener at Oct 25, 1999 at 12:50 pm
    Hello Kurt,
    On Mon, Oct 04 1999, Kurt D. Starsinic wrote:
    On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 02:55:57AM -0400, Robin Berjon wrote:
    At 08:30 01/10/1999 -0400, Rich Bowen wrote:
    Norbert Gruener wrote:
    Version Control
    Software Configuration Management
    Software Development
    I vote for the broader "Software_Development" category.
    Yes, or "Software_Development/Version_Control" ?
    I think that Version_Control is more suitable. People use RCS
    and other revision control systems for other things beside software.
    If there's strong feeling for putting it under a Software_Development
    hierarchy, then I would favor dual-categorization (e.g., Version_Control
    _and_ Software_Development/Version_Control).
    I just wanted to ask about the present status of my inquiry. Is there a
    final agreement and if so what is it ?

    Best Regards,

    Norbert
    --
    Ceterum censeo | PGP encrypted mail preferred.
    Redmondem delendam esse. | PGP Public Key at www.MPA-Garching.MPG.DE/~nog/


    PS: on Sun, 3 Oct 1999, Kurt D. Starsinic wrote:
    I'm working on indexing scripts in tarred/compressed files right now.
    Please check back within the week. I'm just in the middle of testing.
    Excuse me, if I am penetrative, but what is the status of the "upload
    strategies" ?
  • Rich Bowen at Oct 26, 1999 at 2:30 pm
    Norbert Gruener wrote:
    ...
    I think that Version_Control is more suitable. People use RCS
    and other revision control systems for other things beside software.
    If there's strong feeling for putting it under a Software_Development
    hierarchy, then I would favor dual-categorization (e.g., Version_Control
    _and_ Software_Development/Version_Control).
    I just wanted to ask about the present status of my inquiry. Is there a
    final agreement and if so what is it ?
    ...

    I thought that we resolved this, but apparently we never did.
    Version_Control had the most support when we discussed this. Let's go
    ahead and get that category created for Norbert.

    Rich
  • Kurt D. Starsinic at Oct 26, 1999 at 2:35 pm

    On Tue, Oct 26, 1999 at 10:29:52AM -0400, Rich Bowen wrote:
    Norbert Gruener wrote:
    ...
    I think that Version_Control is more suitable. People use RCS
    and other revision control systems for other things beside software.
    If there's strong feeling for putting it under a Software_Development
    hierarchy, then I would favor dual-categorization (e.g., Version_Control
    _and_ Software_Development/Version_Control).
    I just wanted to ask about the present status of my inquiry. Is there a
    final agreement and if so what is it ?
    ...

    I thought that we resolved this, but apparently we never did.
    Version_Control had the most support when we discussed this. Let's go
    ahead and get that category created for Norbert.
    Done and done.

    Peace,
    * Kurt Starsinic (Kurt.Starsinic@isinet.com) --------- Technical Specialist *
    `October. This is one of the peculiarly dangerous months to speculate in |
    stocks in. The others are July, January, September, April, November, |
    May, March, June, December, August, and February.' -- Mark Twain |
    Institute for Scientific Information http://www.isinet.com/
  • Rich Bowen at Oct 5, 1999 at 1:24 pm

    "Kurt D. Starsinic" wrote: ...
    I think that Version_Control is more suitable. People use RCS
    and other revision control systems for other things beside software.
    If there's strong feeling for putting it under a Software_Development
    hierarchy, then I would favor dual-categorization (e.g., Version_Control
    _and_ Software_Development/Version_Control).
    OK, makes sense to me. I only use VC for software. But, now that you
    mention it, there's a strong argument for doing it with config files and
    a variety of other things. Let's go with Version_Control rather than the
    40-character monstrosity! ;-)

    Rich
    --
    Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
    Lexington Perl Mongers - http://lexington.pm.org/
    PGP Key - http://www.rcbowen.com/pgp.txt
  • John Porter at Oct 5, 1999 at 2:43 pm

    Rich Bowen wrote:
    "Kurt D. Starsinic" wrote:
    ...
    I think that Version_Control is more suitable. People use RCS
    and other revision control systems for other things beside software.
    If there's strong feeling for putting it under a Software_Development
    hierarchy, then I would favor dual-categorization (e.g., Version_Control
    _and_ Software_Development/Version_Control).
    OK, makes sense to me. I only use VC for software. But, now that you
    mention it, there's a strong argument for doing it with config files and
    a variety of other things. Let's go with Version_Control rather than the
    40-character monstrosity! ;-)
    Um, what about "Configuration_Management", which is a bit broader, and
    whose abbreviation is nearly universally understood?

    --
    John Porter

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupscripts @
categoriesperl
postedSep 17, '99 at 11:16a
activeOct 26, '99 at 2:35p
posts15
users7
websiteperl.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase