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

Re: Subversion vs. Clear Case

From: Bob Proulx <bob_at_proulx.com>
Date: 2005-07-05 18:33:17 CEST

Didier Trosset wrote:
> Dynamic Views ...
> From my point of view, I guess things happened this way: One day, a
[...very interesting discussion...]

> halted by a 15 minutes compilation.

I also think that much slower compilation machines than we have today
played a roll in the design. And flavored by also having a bunch of
identically configured machines. If someone else on the network has
already compiled that file, usually the one committing, then "why
compile it again" and so the dynamic view with the version filesystem
caused it to appear immediately already compiled. If your project
takes hours to compile then this has the potential to save a huge
amount of time.

But today's computers are much faster. One of the large projects I
work on used to take several hours to compile but is now down to ten
minutes for a complete project rebuild. Saving the compilation time
of a single object is not as critical today as it was then. This
causes a different optimization in build system design today. And
sharing compiled objects means that you must ensure identical systems
which is another problem.

> Don't know if my story hit the point. But what I guess is that ClearCase
> has been started from the idea of having dynamic views. Then everything
> else in ClearCase has been developped to circumvent this weird idea of
> dynamic views.

Very plausible.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Jul 5 19:13:04 2005

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.