[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Subversion vs. VSS

From: Garrett Rooney <rooneg_at_electricjellyfish.net>
Date: 2003-11-08 00:39:48 CET

On Nov 7, 2003, at 5:24 PM, Chris Thomas wrote:

> On Nov 7, 2003, at 12:21 PM, Kevin Meinert wrote:
>> One advantage (only one I can see) is that VSS manages binary files
>> well,
>> i.e. it has exclusive locking. For this reason I would choose it
>> over CVS
>> or subversion at this point, though SVN will have it after 1.0.
> I think Perforce would be a much better choice than VSS. Perforce
> operates almost exclusively on exclusive locking, although you can
> graft CVS-style merges onto it with external tools. Perforce may be
> expensive, though.

Um, that's not true. Well, the expensive part is true, but the 'almost
exclusively on exclusive locking' isn't. While perforce will inform
you when another user is editing a file when you run 'p4 edit', nothing
stops you from doing so by default, and there is built in merge support
that is quite good. It does have an exclusive locking mode, but in my
experience using it is not the common case (except for binary files).


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Nov 8 00:40:46 2003

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.