From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Mar 16 15:29:16 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2917737B401 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 15:29:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.transactionware.com (mail.transactionware.com [203.14.245.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6936243FA3 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2003 15:29:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from janm@transactionware.com) Received: (qmail 41928 invoked from network); 16 Mar 2003 23:29:26 -0000 Received: from new.transactionware.com (192.168.1.55) by dm.transactionware.com with SMTP; 16 Mar 2003 23:29:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 28788 invoked by uid 1006); 16 Mar 2003 23:29:37 -0000 Received: from janm@transactionware.com by new.transactionware.com by uid 1003 with qmail-scanner-1.10 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4249. . Clear:0. Processed in 0.362726 secs); 16 Mar 2003 23:29:37 -0000 Received: from mosm1.transactionware.com (HELO mosm1) (192.168.1.130) by new.transactionware.com with SMTP; 16 Mar 2003 23:29:37 -0000 From: "Jan Mikkelsen" To: "'Nate Williams'" , "'Terry Lambert'" Cc: "'Sean Chittenden'" , "'Sergey Babkin'" , Subject: RE: making CVS more convenient Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:25:41 +1100 Organization: Transactionware Message-ID: <003301c2ec13$5c8614e0$fc5807ca@mosm1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <15989.1782.166458.477601@emerger.yogotech.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Nate Williams wrote: > The other solution to the problem is the P4 route. Making things so > darn effecient that there's little need to have a local mirror. Where > this falls down is when the remote developer doesn't have a 24x7 > connection to the main repository. From what I've been told ClearCase > allows for 'mirrored read-only' repositories similar to what > most of the > open-source CVS developers have been doing with sup/CVSup for years, > although it's nowhere near as effecient as CVSup at creating > snapshots. The current version of Perforce has "p4proxy" which caches a local copy of the depot files used. To the p4 client, it looks just like the server. The Perforce model makes this a bit easier with a significant amount of client state stored on the server. What is the status of Perforce in the FreeBSD project? Is the issue the absence of a "p4up"? Licensing? Inertia? Regards, Jan Mikkelsen To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message