[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: Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2007-10-01 18:24:49 CEST

On 10/1/07, Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@red-bean.com> wrote:
> > So please tell me that 'p4 edit' is something much more sane than 'svn lock'
> > on an svn:needs-lock file,
> What would "more sane" look like? It's exactly the same. Files are
> read-only by default. 'p4 edit' makes them read-write, and then the
> server tracks your pending changelist. If you don't 'p4 edit', then
> perforce doesn't believe the file is edited, no matter what.
> Of course, the tradeoff is that commands like diff, status, and commit
> never need to scan the working copy for changes: the changelist is
> always defined at all times.

How does Perforce handle situations like the following?

1. Applying a patch. Does it have a special command that runs p4
edit for each file the patch modifies?

2. Similar to #1, but you copy entire files over the top of existing.
 I love how SVN just handles this.

3. Running a script or command line that modifies files. Do you have
to work p4 edit into this process for each file you want to touch?

I am assuming it does not get in the way of any of these fairly common
operations. I just do not understand how it does not get in the way.

Mark Phippard
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 1 18:25:01 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.