From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 29 23:23:48 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D9DA16A4CF; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:23:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from TRANG.nuxi.com (trang.nuxi.com [66.93.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D44A43D45; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:23:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by TRANG.nuxi.com (8.13.1/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i7TNNlnS095297; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:23:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id i7TNNl7J095296; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:23:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:23:46 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" To: Tim Kientzle Message-ID: <20040829232346.GA95117@dragon.nuxi.com> Mail-Followup-To: David O'Brien , Tim Kientzle , current@freebsd.org References: <200408160104.03708.chris@behanna.org> <20040826005527.GF54515@spiff.melthusia.org> <20040829223905.GB92947@dragon.nuxi.com> <41325D89.5040806@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41325D89.5040806@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-CURRENT Organization: The NUXI BSD Group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Public Access to Perforce? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: current@freebsd.org List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:23:48 -0000 On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 03:49:45PM -0700, Tim Kientzle wrote: > >Ask Perforce to port to 64-bit AMD64. That would allow them to have a > >lot more memory for their in-memory operations. > > Another possibility would be to switch from Perforce > to something like SVN. > > I'm not sure how it compares to Perforce, It is amazing the number of people that keep suggesting things like this and yet don't compare the two things they suggest to know how they really compare. For what the project uses Perforce for, SVN would offer nothing. > but > SVN has much better branch and merge support > than CVS does. Oh? SVN's own developers say "Currently, Subversion's merge support is essentially the same as CVS's." > It's also specifically designed > for use over slow networks, which would be a real > plus. SVN does nothing better than Perforce, yet removes the advantages of CVS. SVN doesn't remember past merges, so its branching is still embryonic compared to Perforce. Compared to CVS, SVN requires a connection to the main repo, and uses a heavier-weight network transport (requires Apache and HTTP-based WebDAV/DeltaV protocol). -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)