But that is the point: is the
question of process where a version has to know about the impact or the
observer has to know? That is the question I am posing to Roger et
al. Is versioning observer or user or process or test (all
observers really) independent?
A version obviously impacts the system
where it is installed, but a version is not cognizant of the change impact. What
follows? Version change control is not the same for all observers (same
input, different controls, different outputs). What you would not want is
to have multiple controls over the same process. That is the classic
recipe for chaos.
The reason for this part of the thread is
to examine the strategy as realized in the tools. Practically, that is
the answer. This becomes problematic when a production system tool
(such as a RAD) is combined with a version control tool (say CVS vs SourceSave)
that have different critical variables or emphases. The production
team has to understand the fine points and adjust (eg, fine grained vs coarse
grained commits and updates).
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Hunt
[mailto:greg@firmansyah.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007
1:25 PM
To: Len Bullard
Cc: Costello, Roger L.;
xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Data
versioning strategy: address semantic, relatio nship, and syntactic changes?
Actually
Len, I was observing that if you use phase changes as an analogy for change
control, phase changes have to be dependent on the observer, because different
observers experience the impact of changes in radically different ways. I
was not suggesting that that happened in the natural world (hence the reference
to Heisenberg in the original email). The majority of change problems are
not in getting out of test, they are in assessing the impact on the recipient.
On 12/12/07, Len Bullard <len.bullard@uai.com> wrote:
Question: Is
the data versioning problem one of the versioning process or
one of identifying a version and proving its goodness (as in prior to using
it in production)?
I ask because Greg noted privately that a phase transition is dependent on
the observer. I replied that in some cases, say a phase transition
from
water to ice or ice to vapor, the transition is
observer-independent. A
transition of a development code base to a release code base is
test-dependent but should be the same for all observers using the version.
A phase change from a development version to a release version goes to the
heart of a primary difficulty of versioning beyond proof of goodness:
distribution or maintenance of the same phase or different phases on
different platforms.
The challenge of a phase metaphor is declaring and measuring the critical
control variable.
len
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If
you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message
contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named.
If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or
copy this e-mail.
_______________________________________________________________________
XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
