Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 23:50:01 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> To: Mel <fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How to retrieve a directory tree from perforce.freebsd.org? Message-ID: <20070831205001.GB87338@kobe.laptop> In-Reply-To: <200708312001.19944.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> References: <46D81EB4.3060902@queue.to> <46D84C86.8010207@FreeBSD.org> <46D854DB.6080505@queue.to> <200708312001.19944.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2007-08-31 20:01, Mel <fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> wrote: >On Friday 31 August 2007 19:50:19 Howard Goldstein wrote: >> Dang. Like an idiot savant, perforce appears to be (channeling Yoda I >> am?) Time for a script to workaround perforce's needlessly overcomplex >> stupidity. Thanks for letting me know I'm beating my head against the >> wall with the out-of-box tools...binary only at that. > > I assume that since sources in perforce is work-in-progress that may > or not become official work-in-progress (-current), download > complexity is a plus. Not really. It's just the way Perforce works. Even "work in progress" repositories are interesting things to tinker with, since testing before something is finalized in an "official" tree is easier this way :) Perforce can be used for this sort of 'experimental cross-developer testing', and its branching, merging and history support is quite fast, elegant and featureful. It just has a few points which are, to put it mildly, 'annoying' if you are not used to the way Perforce works. Having said that, the perforce.freebsd.org server has played an instrumental role in keeping our CVS tree "clean" from feature-related branches, and its usefulness to the Project should not be underestimated just because of its (few) limitations :-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070831205001.GB87338>