CMS vs. SCS

[Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Luis Colorado wrote:
> Joe,
>
> If you are not a big believer in source control systems like CVS, what do 
> you believe in? Any recommendations?
>   
For production work, CMS (Change Management Systems) provide much more 
functionality than SCS (source control systems).

CMS is indispensable if you have even two programmers in a shop.  Heck, 
CMS is nice if you can afford it in a one-person shop.  It's essential 
to be able to relate objects together (display file and program), to 
check them out, and to be able to promote both source and object through 
phases such as development, QA and production (not to mention being able 
to distribute them to other machines in larger environments).

It's even more of an issue when you start talking about multi-tiered 
environments with things like configuration files, internal databases, 
binary files (DLLs, JARs, etc), images, you name it.  And really good 
systems provide hooks to things like incident reporting and bug 
tracking, and even project management.

Most source control systems are about allowing multiple people to write 
code.  CMS systems are for managing application development and 
distribution.

I recommend none, especially since David Gibbs works for MKS, and if I 
suggested MKS was best I'd be accused of pandering to the chief <grin>. 
(And if I didn't, my posts would mysteriously start being rejected... 
(ducking and running)).

Joe