RE: Source Control (was:Can an RPG module call another RPG module?)

Alan, I don't think Rob is advocating that the source should not be secured
from the development team.  This can be accomplished without migrating the
source to the production system.  There are numerous change control packages
like Aldon and Turnover designed for exactly this function.  They also
include automatic auditing and object to source comparison checks when
source is "checked out".  In addition, they allow source to be taken by one,
and only one, developer, per release level and maintain a "production"
environment that should be identical to the production system.

As I said in a previous posting, there are problems with keeping the source
on the production machine.  There are also problems with keeping it on the
development machine, even in a "secure" environment handled by change
control packages.  However, I tend to agree with Rob that placing the source
on the production system is more dangerous, especially if noone is comparing
object creation and/or change dates with a log of object creations.

Donald R. Fisher, III
Project Manager
The Roomstore Furniture Company
(804) 784-7600 extension 2124
DFisher@roomstoreeast.com

<clip>
Okay - my turn to aks a question. If the source is NOT migrated to the
production area, and secured from the development team, that means the
source resides on the development area. If a request is made to enhance XYZ,
what guarantee do you have/make that source XYZ has NOT been changed for
what ever reason since the executable has been migrated to the Production
region?
<clip>