Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 12:11:24 -0500 From: Chris BeHanna <chris@behanna.org> To: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Subversion? (Re: HEADS UP: Importing csup into base) Message-ID: <BA422F74-E7F9-4F53-9A88-B89E2255FF00@behanna.org> In-Reply-To: <20060304152433.W61086@fledge.watson.org> References: <20060304141957.14716.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20060304152433.W61086@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 4, 2006, at 10:32 AM, Robert Watson wrote: > On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com wrote: > >> I wanted to avoid turning this thread into a discussion of the >> different VCSs but perhaps that might be healthy. Many people like >> perforce... I wonder if the developer community would be happy to >> accept a "commercial" solution. > > [...Perforce met a critical need for branched development, and > Subversion could not import the repo at the time...] And, as I recall, at the time, subversion's ability to manage branches in a lightweight fashion was just not there. How is it now? If it still cannot compare to Perforce, then it's likely a non-starter. My employer has a fairly large Perforce installation going, and every now and again, someone rolls out the open source replacement bikeshed, but it runs right into the "can it handle our branched development model?" brick wall and stops, dead. Perforce's *huge* weakness is the way it handles its metadata (it wants to keep some of its databases entirely in RAM, and they get HUGE). This prevents distributing the repo, and it prevents granting public, anonymous access to the p4 side of the world for freebsd.org (cripes, you'd need an E15K or an Altix cluster to have enough RAM and backing store for that!), but nothing else I've seen can do branching and merging the way Perforce can. -- Chris BeHanna chris@behanna.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BA422F74-E7F9-4F53-9A88-B89E2255FF00>