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

Re: Perforce comparison

From: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: 2007-09-27 02:41:28 CEST

On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 17:26 -0700, Mark Phippard wrote:
> Has anyone seen this document Perforce has which compares it to Subversion?
>
> http://www.perforce.com/perforce/reviews.html
>
> I know a lot of you use Perforce, so I'd be curious what you think.

"Subversion doesn't offer a method to resolve different line-ending and
carriage-return requirements for files being transferred between Windows
and Unix." Fascinating.

I think their "distributed development" row (which is actually just
about slow network links) kind of inverts the story. My muddled
understanding is that Perforce is much more dependent upon a fast
network link because you typically NFS-mount your working copy. So
yeah, they have a proxy caching server because they *need* one, and
Subversion doesn't because there's no real need. With Subversion, you
can work over a medium-latency network link without setting up any kind
of proxy and not feel much pain.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 27 02:41:46 2007

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.