Timeline for Source Control: Roles and Responsibilities - Best Practices
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 1, 2012 at 5:42 | comment | added | softveda | I second Jamie, all the time spent merging or waiting for a merge to happen should be recorded so that you have evidence. There is no "best practice" that fits all companies. I have worked in large company where this task was done by a dedicated configuration management team. I my current company there is a dedicated release management team that doesn't do the physical job of merging to main but they are the logical owner and do audit it. But IMHO ops is not usually the one that touches source code. | |
| Jan 31, 2012 at 23:04 | comment | added | Wyatt Barnett | Gotcha. Not sure if anything specific is in there, but the bits on source control in The Pragmatic Programmer might have some gems in them. From what it sounds like it was a gross overreaction to some bad developers rather than a thought out policy decision or some politics. I'd settle for a deal where Ops owns merges into Main. I'd also push to make ops responsible for ensuring the merge don't break anything, which will probably end up with them getting out of it . . . | |
| Jan 31, 2012 at 22:51 | comment | added | Michael Chatfield | I plan on having such a meeting, but it would help if I could show this policy goes against industry "best practices". | |
| Jan 31, 2012 at 20:26 | history | edited | Wyatt Barnett | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 16 characters in body
|
| Jan 31, 2012 at 20:19 | comment | added | Jamie F | +1, I was typing something similar: document the lost time and effort: let decision makers make an informed choice: is the risk of whatever they are trying to avoid with the current restrictive policy worth the cost? | |
| Jan 31, 2012 at 20:14 | history | answered | Wyatt Barnett | CC BY-SA 3.0 |