I have heard this several times, that one should always update before committing to a version control system. Why is that ?
I have heard this several times, that one should always update before committing to
Share
Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
I have heard this several times, that one should always update before committing to a version control system. Why is that ?
If you don’t update you risk facing a conflict if someone else has edited any of the files you want to commit while you were editing them.
In source control systems like Subversion you won’t be allowed to commit before you update even if changes belong to different lines – you will have to first do an update then possibly resolve conflicts, then you’ll be allowed to commit. It works like this: you start committing, the Subversion repo server checks whether any of your changes conflict with recent changes, if any of them does conflict the commit is rejected as a whole.
In older systems (I can’t name an example) that perhaps could cause serious problems like overwriting changes or doing an incomplete commit (some files committed, some not).