Mark Mielke wrote: > The model is a bit easier to implement in ClearCase and GIT, since > these are both effectively the working copy is a different stream from > the parent whereas Subversion designer work flows tend to work > directly on "trunk".
In both ClearCase and GIT (and more so in ClearCase) you pay for it by requiring "someone" do constantly merge stuff to some "stable" mainline. Moreover, the per-developer branch model is just one way of using ClearCase and IMHO one of the more broken recommendations. I once worked in a company where one of the teams used exactly that approach and had constantly broken builds because one bit or another was not properly merged from developer-specific branches to the mainline. When I asked them why not use a little less granularity in their branches, e.g., at least per-task or per-bugfix, not per-developer, the response was that "then the developers would work more slowly because they'd have to worry about other peoples' commits." QED. (You can get the same effect by creating a branch for each developer in Subversion. You can imagine the horror that integration then becomes.) (And just FYI, ClearCase for example /does/ provide a mixed-revision working copy model.) -- Brane
