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

Re: Subversion vs. Perforce

From: Marc Singer <elf_at_buici.com>
Date: 2003-09-10 02:19:02 CEST

I sympathize. I'm doing something similar with one of my clients. I
hope they'll be OK with subversion since the only SCM they're familiar
with is VSS which, IMHO, is little better than a trash can.

The reason I prefer subversion is that it
  a) doesn't use locking
  b) doesn't have a concept of a working directory as known by the server

The trouble is that in a point-by-point comparison, Perforce is more
mature and should probably be selected. Again, IMHO, the key feature
that subversion lacks is drop-dead easy branch merging. It's planned
and it looks like the plan is an excellent one. AFAICT from reading
the Perforce documentation, subversion is much easier to setup, but
that probably isn't going to carry much weight.


On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 04:38:52PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> In our young startup I've installed Subversion because I could, and
> we've been using it for about a month now successfully (admittedly
> I've done 95% of all checkins, we've not started using Apache, and
> I've failed miserably at building from source for Red Hat 9 -- a
> mystery which I don't have time to research further alas). We now
> have a real VP of engineering, and he wants to switch to Perforce.
> This is not a fight I want to spend a lot of time on, but if there's
> an obvious rebuttal to his arguments for switching I'd like to hear
> it.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Sep 10 02:20:03 2003

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

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