3 ms·

>VCS dates back quite some time… Let's see. From the story: >I first met Mel when I went to work for Royal McBee Computer Corp... [The firm] had just started

>VCS dates back quite some time… Let's see. From the story: >I first met Mel when I went to work for Royal McBee Computer Corp... [The firm] had just started to manufacture the RPC-4000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGP-30#RPC_4000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGP-30#RPC_4000 > the General Precision RPC 4000, announced in 1960 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Version_control#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Version_control#History >IBM's OS/360 IEBUPDTE software update tool dates back to 1962, arguably a precursor to version control system tools. A full system designed for source code control was started in 1972, Source Code Control System for the same system (OS/360). The events of the story predate the precursors of VCSs by two years, and the earliest true VCS by a decade.

still_grokking 4y ago
As you like to discuss this detail: I can't find any definitive info when this computer got actually manufactured ("announced in 1960" doesn't mean strictly the same). But this was the time Mel was met first time by the author. The story plays likely some time thereafter. I guess some significant time, because it takes time even for a genius to become familiar enough with a machine to do all this kind of trickery described in the story. I think it may make sense to assume even some years passed between when the author met Mel the first time and Mel's departure form said company. So I wouldn't be even so much off with the VCS statement—which actually doesn't state any relation between the usage of VCS and the story. I've only said that "VCS dates back quite some time". Which is obviously true. ;-) But, all this actually doesn't matter. The more important statement was the following. Which is a direct reply to "code didn't need to be maintained", which is in my opinion just not true. I did not say VCS was used back than for that purpose. I guess they preferred more a sort of solid hard copy. :-)
jboy55 4y ago
My guess is that the earliest Code Versioning systems were completely manual, "Duplicate your tape, mark it 1.2, store it in drawer". And these manual processes were brought to and duplicated on computers when code began to be stored on the computers themselves, instead of through cards and paper tape. Certainly if you were a business, you had an extreme business interest in keeping your "known good" stack of cards in a place, and every revision in code required a new stack of cards. "Hey, the machine just ate 10 cards from the payroll software, can we get duplicates made?" "No, those were the originals, guess we're SOL no one gets paid" never happened. Most likely "Ok, version 1.34 of the payroll software that was updated last week? Cards 1032 to 1042? Duplicate cards will be up to you within the hour" or "We have to revert to the old payroll processing software, can you create a new fresh copy of 1.33, 1.34 has some bugs and we need to get tonights run in?"

still_grokking 4y ago

As you like to discuss this detail: I can't find any definitive info when this computer got actually manufactured ("announced in 1960" doesn't mean strictly the same). But this was the time Mel was met first time by the author. The story plays likely some time thereafter. I guess some significant time, because it takes time even for a genius to become familiar enough with a machine to do all this kind of trickery described in the story. I think it may make sense to assume even some years passed between when the author met Mel the first time and Mel's departure form said company. So I wouldn't be even so much off with the VCS statement—which actually doesn't state any relation between the usage of VCS and the story. I've only said that "VCS dates back quite some time". Which is obviously true. ;-) But, all this actually doesn't matter. The more important statement was the following. Which is a direct reply to "code didn't need to be maintained", which is in my opinion just not true. I did not say VCS was used back than for that purpose. I guess they preferred more a sort of solid hard copy. :-)

jboy55 4y ago

My guess is that the earliest Code Versioning systems were completely manual, "Duplicate your tape, mark it 1.2, store it in drawer". And these manual processes were brought to and duplicated on computers when code began to be stored on the computers themselves, instead of through cards and paper tape. Certainly if you were a business, you had an extreme business interest in keeping your "known good" stack of cards in a place, and every revision in code required a new stack of cards. "Hey, the machine just ate 10 cards from the payroll software, can we get duplicates made?" "No, those were the originals, guess we're SOL no one gets paid" never happened. Most likely "Ok, version 1.34 of the payroll software that was updated last week? Cards 1032 to 1042? Duplicate cards will be up to you within the hour" or "We have to revert to the old payroll processing software, can you create a new fresh copy of 1.33, 1.34 has some bugs and we need to get tonights run in?"