Result for Question 2.1

Show All Relevant Data (Sort by Rating)

Show Only Top Ten
Show Only Numerical Data
Show All Relevant Data (Sort by Controversy)

Go up to Question 2
Go to Question 2.2

2.1.

Source Code Repository

Average
Totally
Irrelevant
Extremely
Relevant
No. of
Votes

2.1.1 Brief Description
2.1.1.1 CVS (Concurrent Versions System)
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark concurrent version system; client/server source control system
Joseph cvs
Jacob version control system
Alvin Concurrent Versioning System. Allows revision of a centralized copy of source code by many developers simultaneously.
Phil a tool to allow concurrent development of software
Brendan helps track changes to projects
Luke A code repository with support for versions
Gabriel Tools for version control and computer supportes cooperative work
8 Responses
Relevant Glossary
Concurrent Versions System
2.1.1.2 Client/server source control system
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark concurrent version system; client/server source control system
2.1.1.3 Maintains a centralised repository of current and previous versions of source code, documentation, etc.
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
William A versioning repository for the storage of code, documentation, websites, and other data that is of importance to the participants in
the project. Concrete example: CVS.
Alvin Concurrent Versioning System. Allows revision of a centralized copy of source code by many developers simultaneously.
Austin Maintains a repository of current and previous versions of source code, documentation, etc.
Brendan helps track changes to projects
Luke A code repository with support for versions
Gabriel Tools for version control and computer supportes cooperative work
6 Responses
Relevant Glossary
Concurrent Versions System
2.1.1.4 Allow concurrent development of software, support cooperative work by many developers
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Alvin Concurrent Versioning System. Allows revision of a centralized copy of source code by many developers simultaneously.
Phil a tool to allow concurrent development of software
Gabriel Tools for version control and computer supportes cooperative work
3 Responses
Relevant Glossary
Concurrent Versions System

2.1.2 What are the important features of this tools?
2.1.2.1 Complied to established standard, widely available and understood
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark established standard, widely available and understood
2.1.2.2 Client/server architecture, works over a network
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark client/server, works over a network
2.1.2.3 Permitting concurrent development without locking and the ability to handle conflicting updates
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark permits concurrent development without locking
William Because of the geographically dispersed nature of participants, it
must be extremely good in handling conflicting updates.
Phil it allows multiple writers to update the software (independently of each other)
3 Responses
2.1.2.4 Handling of branching of code
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Joseph branching
Alvin Allows branching of code
Luke Branching of code base
3 Responses
Relevant Glossary
Branching
2.1.2.5 Tagging of various points in development
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Luke Tagging of various points in development
2.1.2.6 Version control
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Joseph version
Phil it maintains the history of the software
Luke Version control
3 Responses
2.1.2.7 Rollback
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Luke Security and rollback features
2.1.2.8 Allowing anonymous users read only access
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
William It should be usable both "through-the-web" as well have locally available clients. This allows a casual bypasser to peruse the repository and the active developer to have powertools that employ
a native user interface.
Alvin Ability to allow anonymous passwordless access to source repositories (read only)
2.1.2.9 Security features, e.g. usernames and passwords protection, access via ssh encryption
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
William It should be usable both "through-the-web" as well have locally available clients. This allows a casual bypasser to peruse the repository and the active developer to have powertools that employ
a native user interface.
Alvin Ability to allow usernames and passwords for access
Alvin Can be set up to run with ssh encrypted.
Luke Security and rollback features
4 Responses
2.1.2.10 Accessable both through WWW as well as a local client program
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
William It should be usable both "through-the-web" as well have locally available clients. This allows a casual bypasser to peruse the repository and the active developer to have powertools that employ
a native user interface.

2.1.3 What are the important usability factors of this tools?
2.1.3.1 Learnability
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark Learnability
2.1.3.2 Memorability
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark Memorability
2.1.3.3 Simple and natural dialogue
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark Simple and natural dialogue
Joseph Simple and natural dialogue
2.1.3.4 Speak the users' language
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark Speak the users' language
2.1.3.5 Connectivity
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Jacob Connectivity
2.1.3.6 Ease of Navigation
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
William Ease of Navigation
2.1.3.7 Coherence
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
William Coherence
Gabriel Coherence
2.1.3.8 Accuracy
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
William Accuracy
2.1.3.9 Feedback
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
William Feedback
2.1.3.10 Collaboration - Enables distributed users to collaborate by easy synchronization of their work
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Gabriel Collaboration
2.1.3.11 Completeness
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Phil Completeness
Gabriel Completeness
2.1.3.12 Updated Frequently
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Gabriel Updated Frequently
2.1.3.14 Prevent errors
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Joseph Prevent errors
2.1.3.15 Efficiency
No Votes
0
Details
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Luke Efficiency

Show Only Top Ten
Show Only Numerical Data
Show All Relevant Data (Sort by Controversy)

Go up to Question 2
Go to Question 2.2

Generated On: 25 Oct 2002