bse2000@gmx.de wrote:
>I read an 'old' thread about 'Subversion vs. Perforce' and wonder whether
>there are perhaps more arguments I could list in order to stay with
>Subversion and to convince Perforce users to switch to it.
>
>
I've gotta say, when I first started playing with Subversion I got a
warm fuzzy feeling from how similar to Perforce it is. As other folks
have said, the two systems support the same basic features (atomic
commit, move/rename support). Perforce costs more, but you do get extra
features for the cash - branching and merging is a breeze with Perforce,
plus you're getting paid-for tech support (although Subversion's support
on this list is, frankly, amazing). On the downside, networking is less
flexible with Perforce - I think you have to be able to see a particular
port on the server, am a bit out of the loop on different connection
tech, and you don't get offline development capabilities.
If money were no object and I was doing a lot of branching and merging
I'd pick Perforce (for example in a corporate setting with crazy
development cycles and everyone on the same LAN). If branching and
merging are less important to you, but offline operation and cheap
(free) cost are important, Subversion is great.
Cheers,
Mike.
p.s. Branching and merging in Subversion works great as long as you
manage it properly, there's nothing "wrong" with it really. It's just
that Perforce helps you sort out wacky multi-branched repositories and
the repeated-merge problem and is really good at doing so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Nov 23 03:29:20 2004