Sent from my [rhymes with tryPod] ;-)
On 8 Oct 2009, at 18:04, James Talbott <jtalbott_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not interested in starting a flame-war between SVN and AccuRev.
> I'm merely stating that Stephen's claims are able to be demonstrably
> proven false,
I have still got the depots with the "lost" versions which accurev
says were kept but refuses to give back
I have still got the depots with the artifacts that disappear when
I have still got the depots where the state of all streams at specific
points in time is inconsistent (ie if I recreate a snapshot of the
exact same stream at the exact same time I get a different view from
the existing snapshot... ok thus only affects a 3hour period in the
entire 7 year history but I stand by my claims/facts)
> although clearly a newsgroup forum isn't the place where that would
> happen. I'm also stating that I am only aware of a single customer
> who was using AccuRev who migrated away to SVN.
well we will not be renewing
> Others could have done so without my knowledge, but based on our 95%
> plus renewal rate, they would be few and far between, and no one of
that may be because once you sip the accurev koolaid it is virtually
impossible to transfer your history out of accurev. (i managed to do
it, but it took a lot of effort and, fortunately for you, I cannot
share the tools I created with the world)
> Lastly, my message was intended to be for Bryan so that he will
> continue to avail himself of the services AccuRev provides him to
> help his organization make an educated decision, as opposed to
> listening to the opinions of someone who clearly has a biased agenda.
I would think that the tone of my original message made it quite
clear. I _hate_ accurev as an SCM.
I used to like it until I dug deep and wrote a conversion utility...
when you see what the data model is under the hood... well have a look
yourself and make up your own mind. my opinion is known
> Unlike many of the zealots out there, AccuRev does not pretend to be
> the solution for everyone. However, should not those considering
> the option evaluate for themselves instead of basing their decision
> on unsubstantiated claims?
I state what we found. for 95% of the problems we found, I know why
accurev is behaving in the counterintuitive way that it is... if I
were to explain, you would probably say, but that is Functions as
Designed. I'd say the design is crap
> Best regards,
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 12:52 PM, vishwajeet singh <dextrous85_at_gmail.com
> > wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 10:13 PM, James Talbott <jtalbott_at_gmail.com>
> You are entitled to your opinion about AccuRev and I will not
> attempt to change your mind, but the statements you make below are
> patently false.
> > in practice you can never trust promoting
> > changes will have the correct effect.
> > I have promoted files only to have them disappear from the stream
> I am
> > promoting into as well as from the stream I am promoting from...
> only to be
> > replaced by another version.
> > There are the versions that we "kept" which AccuCrap refuses to
> give us
> > back...
> > There are sections of our history which AccuCrap can only give a
> guess as to
> > what the repository looked like (due to problems with the metadata)
> I can guess at what company you work for as I am only aware of a
> single customer who has ever migrated from AccuRev to SVN,
> was that a joke or you are serious......I personally know couple of
> companies who moved from AccuRev to SVN....obviously I can not name
> them and I was kind of part of that migration.
> and that was at the behest of an executive who is no longer even
> with that company. I would encourage Bryan to continue working with
> the excellent resources AccuRev provides to allow them to fully
> evaluate AccuRev's capabilities. At that point, if it isn't for
> your organization, as long as you made a fair decision we support
> it. But please be aware that the FUD Stephen is spreading is not
> the experience of 99.9% of our customers,
> How do you prove that what Stephen is saying is FUD and what you are
> saying is correct..
> and is in fact probably caused by a lack of education and interest
> on their part to adopting the solution.
> Wow what a lame excuse.....I don't believe even after paying some
> one will do that.....
> Vishwajeet Singh
> +91-9657702154 | email@example.com | http://singhvishwajeet.com
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/vishwajeets | LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/singhvishwajeet
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-10-08 23:25:44 CEST