[p4] Comparisons - Rob Jellinghaus - com.perforce.perforce-user

21 messages in com.perforce.perforce-user[p4] Comparisons

From	Sent On	Attachments
Tim Henrion	17 Jan 2001 07:19
Slootweg Paul	17 Jan 2001 07:23
William	17 Jan 2001 07:23
Steve Bennett	17 Jan 2001 08:31
Steve Bennett	17 Jan 2001 12:19
Jeff Graver	17 Jan 2001 13:19
Tim Henrion	19 Jan 2001 06:13
Jeff A. Bowles	19 Jan 2001 06:48
axel...@coremedia-ag.com	19 Jan 2001 07:20
Arnt Gulbrandsen	19 Jan 2001 07:42
William	19 Jan 2001 07:53
William	19 Jan 2001 07:53
Robert Cowham	19 Jan 2001 08:07
Arnt Gulbrandsen	19 Jan 2001 08:10
Steve Bennett	19 Jan 2001 08:48
Geoff Talvola	19 Jan 2001 09:46
Steve Bennett	19 Jan 2001 10:05
Dave Foglesong	19 Jan 2001 10:16
William	19 Jan 2001 13:00
Rob Jellinghaus	22 Jan 2001 00:23
Arnt Gulbrandsen	22 Jan 2001 04:02

Subject:	[p4] Comparisons
From:	Rob Jellinghaus (Rob....@quokka.com)
Date:	01/22/2001 12:23:49 AM
List:	com.perforce.perforce-user

There seem to me to be two main features in VSS sharing beyond what is in Perforce:

- The ability to automatically update a set of clients when changes are made to some shared-between-projects files.

- The ability to create synonyms for shared-between-projects files, such that whenever a base file is updated, the "aliases" of that file are also updated.

Couldn't one do the former by writing a script which would sync a set of clients viewing a given directory whenever changes are submitted to that directory?

Couldn't one do the latter by writing a script which automatically executes an integrate to update the "aliases" whenever changes are submitted to the base versions?

(The question of whether we *should* do these things is a separate discussion from how we *could* do these things! :-)

In neither case is it as simple as the server-supported VSS solution, and it definitely requires extra scripting and client / branch spec design effort... but given VSS's well-known other problems, that's OK with me. Has anyone written tools like this for Perforce yet?

Cheers! Rob

-----Original Message----- From: Steve Bennett To: Geoff Talvola Cc: perforce-user at perforce.com Sent: 1/19/01 10:05 Subject: Re: [p4] Comparisons

Geoff Talvola wrote:

Steve Bennett wrote:

I can sum up the reasons for Sharing in two words: "Common Code". Most programmers I know develop, over time, a library of code modules which can be used for multiple different projects and products. Somehow, in the source tree, you need to be able to have that code available to the various projects. Also, if a bug is found in that code, it has to be fixed in ALL the projects that code is used in -- making branches doesn't cut it because you would have to manually merge fixes across EVERY branch made, which may be fine for a small number of files with a few branches, but is logistically a nightmare when you have a LOT of common code used in a LOT of projects. Having the file Shared, if you fix it in one place, it's fixed

everywhere.

For common code, the ideal approach is to put it into a separately compiled library, and use the library in all of the projects that need it.

It's certainly easy for C/C++ projects. Maybe for other development environments it's not as easy?

Well... it *would* be easy for a lot of environments, but not ours. We have common code modules that are loaded into:

Win32 applications Windows WDM drivers Windows VxDs Windows DLLs Mac applications Mac INITs Mac OS X drivers

...all of which have different compile requirements and library formats. And that's not even counting compile time defines which change the behavior of the common code, and issues such as different compile flags on different projects.

-->Steve Bennett

_______________________________________________ perforce-user mailing list - perforce-user at perforce.com http://maillist.perforce.com/mailman/listinfo/perforce-user

Received: from ribotargets.com (darius.ribotargets.co.uk [194.129.39.11]) by frankenrouter.perforce.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA69893 for <perforce-user at perforce.com>; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 09:45:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3A687C92.C2E64F7E at ribotargets.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 17:42:42 +0000 From: Dave Morley <d.morley at ribotargets.com> Organization: RiboTargets X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; I; IRIX 6.5 IP32) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: perforce-user at perforce.com Subject: Re: [p4] Comparisons References: <B68DDA3B.2585%bennett at jmisoftware.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: perforce-user-admin at perforce.com Errors-To: perforce-user-admin at perforce.com X-BeenThere: perforce-user at perforce.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta2 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Discuss Perforce with other users <perforce-user.perforce.com>

Steve Bennett wrote:

And the downside of course is, if you introduce a bug in one place, it's introduced everywhere.

I used to use VSS and loved and hated shared files for all the reasons already discussed. But the Perforce model is much more logical and robust once you get the hang of it.

-- Dave Morley RiboTargets, Cambridge, UK

Received: from ds-3.arslogica.net (relay.dylan-user.org [216.110.45.249]) by frankenrouter.perforce.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA69299 for <perforce-user at perforce.com>; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 08:26:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from acm.org (www.link-cafm.com [207.171.227.122] (may be forged)) by ds-3.arslogica.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11715; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 09:13:01 -0600 Message-ID: <3A686A4C.F7225C07 at acm.org> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 08:24:44 -0800 From: Kaelin Colclasure <kaelin at acm.org> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17-4smp-klc i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Guan Teh <Guan.Teh at THINQ.com> CC: "'perforce-user at perforce.com'" <perforce-user at perforce.com> Subject: Re: [p4] Perforce vs. Clear Case References: <D0FE0677B9EA974FA1AE27B8385FA8AC28C29C at svan0200.TrainingNet.Org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: perforce-user-admin at perforce.com Errors-To: perforce-user-admin at perforce.com X-BeenThere: perforce-user at perforce.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta2 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Discuss Perforce with other users <perforce-user.perforce.com>

Guan Teh wrote:

Has anyone used both Perforce and ClearCase and would share his/her experience about which is better ?

We are at the crossroad of deciding which of these products is superior for a web application development enviornment with multiple remote offices.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

That's your key factor right there. Perforce works wonderfully in this scenario. Clearcase can barely be made to work at all, and then only after spending a fortune on licenses.

Unless you have a huge pile of cash that you're just dying to dispose of quickly, Perforce is a hands down win in this environment.

Your comment will be much appreciated indeed.

Thanks, Guan

Go with Perforce. You won't regret it.

-- Kaelin

Received: from mail2.lycos.com (mail2.lycos.com [208.146.26.19]) by frankenrouter.perforce.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA68973 for <perforce-user at perforce.com>; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 07:46:52 -0800 (PST) From: dmar...@lycos-inc.com Received: from SMTPNotes1.ma.lycos.com (smtpnotes1.ma.lycos.com
[209.202.245.15]) by mail2.lycos.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with SMTP id f0JFfKw09715; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 10:41:20 -0500 (EST) Received: by SMTPNotes1.ma.lycos.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.5 (863.2 5-20-1999))
id 852569D9.00566AED ; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 10:43:54 -0500 X-Lotus-FromDomain: LYCOS To: Guan Teh <Guan.Teh at THINQ.com> cc: "'perforce-user at perforce.com'" <perforce-user at perforce.com> Message-ID: <052569D9.0056676A.00 at SMTPNotes1.ma.lycos.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 10:36:57 -0500 Subject: Re: [p4] Perforce vs. Clear Case Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: perforce-user-admin at perforce.com Errors-To: perforce-user-admin at perforce.com X-BeenThere: perforce-user at perforce.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta2 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Discuss Perforce with other users <perforce-user.perforce.com>

Your network had better be 100% reliable and very fast.

ClearCase requires an extremely robust network in order to perform in a somewhat reasonable manner. I believe it now supports a form of "snapshot" view of their repository that is in some remote way similar to the local workspace provided by Perforce, but their primary way of working is in a modified file system (based on NFS) that tracks each file access. This is extremely costly to the CPU and network intensive. ClearCase also requires a significant investment in support staff.

ClearCase has more features than Perforce. That is not to say, in any way, that it is better. It just has more. But do you really need the eyebrow plucker on the top-end swiss army knife for it to work as a good knife? If you do, then keep investigating ClearCase. I don't believe the price point for ClearCase is justified by these extra features.

My best advice would be to determine the list of all features that you require from your source control system (include any you might possibly need in the future too), and then determine if Perforce and ClearCase both meet your needs. If they both meet your needs, then go with Perforce. Perforce is faster, not network intensive, has a small footprint, and requires minimal support staff.

These are my own personal opinions and not those of my employer. --> I personally dislike lawyers too.

Best of luck,

++David

Guan Teh <Guan.Teh at THINQ.com> on 01/18/2001 05:52:31 PM

To: "'perforce-user at perforce.com'" <perforce-user at perforce.com>

cc: (bcc: David Markley/Lycos)

Subject [p4] Perforce vs. Clear Case :

Has anyone used both Perforce and ClearCase and would share his/her experience about which is better ?

We are at the crossroad of deciding which of these products is superior for a web application development enviornment with multiple remote offices.

Your comment will be much appreciated indeed.

Thanks, Guan

_______________________________________________ perforce-user mailing list - perforce-user at perforce.com http://maillist.perforce.com/mailman/listinfo/perforce-user

Guan Teh wrote:

Has anyone used both Perforce and ClearCase and would share his/her experience about which is better ?

We are at the crossroad of deciding which of these products is superior for a web application development enviornment with multiple remote offices.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

That's your key factor right there. Perforce works wonderfully in this scenario. Clearcase can barely be made to work at all, and then only after spending a fortune on licenses.

Unless you have a huge pile of cash that you're just dying to dispose of quickly, Perforce is a hands down win in this environment.

Your comment will be much appreciated indeed.

Thanks, Guan

Go with Perforce. You won't regret it.

-- Kaelin