<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="/stylesheets/rss.css"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/">
  <channel>
    <title>Floehopper: Tag control</title>
    <link>http://blog.floehopper.org/articles/tag/control?tag=control</link>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>40</ttl>
    <description>thoughts on the bergy bits of life</description>
    <item>
      <title>Prefer Commit Notes over Comments</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;My colleague, &lt;a href="http://blog.seagul.co.uk/"&gt;Chris&lt;/a&gt;, recently posted about &lt;a href="http://blog.seagul.co.uk/articles/2008/03/28/version-control-commit-note-best-practice-or-not-you-decide"&gt;what makes a good commit note&lt;/a&gt;. His main point is that a good commit note should explain &lt;strong&gt;why&lt;/strong&gt; the changeset exists rather than &lt;strong&gt;what&lt;/strong&gt; it contains (which should be more self-evident). I agree with this and (as Chris mentions) it&amp;#8217;s of particular benefit when you have to do some software archeology. I&amp;#8217;d go a step further and say that, for me, the best commit notes express the &lt;em&gt;business&lt;/em&gt; reason for the changeset. If as a developer you are struggling to explain the business case for a particular change, (imho) you should try to find out before committing &amp;#8211; otherwise how do you know the changeset is delivering value to the business?&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;In a previous post about &lt;a href="http://blog.floehopper.org/articles/2007/05/10/prefer-tests-over-comments"&gt;preferring tests over comments&lt;/a&gt;, I expressed similar sentiments about using comments and tests to explain &lt;strong&gt;why&lt;/strong&gt; rather than &lt;strong&gt;what&lt;/strong&gt;. Chris&amp;#8217; post prompted me to re-read that old post and I noticed that it didn&amp;#8217;t explain why I &lt;a href="http://blog.floehopper.org/articles/2007/05/10/prefer-tests-over-comments"&gt;prefer tests over comments&lt;/a&gt;. The reason is that comments have a nasty habit of becoming out-of-date and getting left lying around to confuse the unwary, whereas you are forced to keep tests up-to-date (assuming they are part of a &lt;a href="http://martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html"&gt;continuous integration build&lt;/a&gt;). For similar reasons I also think that commit notes are better than code comments, because they are forever associated with a snapshot of the code at the time they were written &amp;#8211; leaving less scope for confusion.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2008 19:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:11955d9f-4314-46f7-b708-dca8b3860930</guid>
      <author>James Mead</author>
      <link>http://blog.floehopper.org/articles/2008/03/29/prefer-commit-notes-over-comments</link>
      <category>version</category>
      <category>control</category>
      <category>commit</category>
      <category>note</category>
      <category>changeset</category>
      <category>svn</category>
      <category>vcs</category>
      <category>comment</category>
      <category>why</category>
      <category>what</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>CruiseControl.rb for Mocha</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;We have our own home-grown &lt;a href="http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html"&gt;continuous integration&lt;/a&gt; application at &lt;a href="http://www.reevoo.com"&gt;work&lt;/a&gt;, but a couple of weeks ago, I decided to have a go at getting &lt;a href="http://cruisecontrolrb.thoughtworks.com/"&gt;CruiseControl.rb&lt;/a&gt; up and running at home for &lt;a href="http://mocha.rubyforge.org"&gt;Mocha&lt;/a&gt;. It all went pretty smoothly and I&amp;#8217;m happy with the result. Thanks are due to the CruiseControl.rb &lt;a href="http://cruisecontrolrb.thoughtworks.com/documentation/team"&gt;team&lt;/a&gt; for clear instructions and a simple-to-use application.&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#8217;d like to publish the url for my CruiseControl instance, but I&amp;#8217;m concerned about random punters clicking the build button and loading my already creaking server, so a screenshot will have to suffice for now&amp;#8230;&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;div style="" class="flickrplugin"&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesthecat/447423649"&gt;&lt;img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/215/447423649_7241b548c5.jpg" width="500" height="120" alt="Mocha-CruiseControl.rb" title="Mocha-CruiseControl.rb"/&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;It would be nice if you only saw the build button if you were logged in. I feel a feature request coming on&amp;#8230;&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;On a related note, it&amp;#8217;s great to see that there has been some effort going into getting a &lt;a href="http://cruisecontrolrb.thoughtworks.com/builds/RubyOnRails/"&gt;RubyOnRails CruiseControl.rb instance&lt;/a&gt; set up.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2007 12:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:d9fe9606-7ecb-4640-a028-55d8e520c105</guid>
      <author>James Mead</author>
      <link>http://blog.floehopper.org/articles/2007/04/05/cruisecontrol-rb-for-mocha</link>
      <category>cruise</category>
      <category>control</category>
      <category>ruby</category>
      <category>mocha</category>
      <category>thoughtworks</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
