In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, François Pinard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> [Mike Meyer]
>
> > [...] I generally wind up cursing at [subversion] at least once a day.
> Would you accept elaborating a bit on the motivations of the cursing?
> Your message says Perforce does nice things, one might fuzzily imply
> that Subversion is bad or misbehaves on the same, but I do not read any
> definite assertion against Subversion. Having Perforce better does not
> necessarily makes Subversion bad. So my question. :-)
Well, the only thing that subversion does that I'd call bad is leave
turds in my development directory. I'm tired of having to tell
commands to ignore .svn files. Of course, Perforce is the only source
control system I know of that doesn't do this.
Subversion doesn't deal as well with merges as perforce. I wouldn't
say subversion is bad - but Perforce is better.
In the one interfile branch I've done, subversion doesn't remember
what deltas have already been applied to the branch, forcing me to
work that out from the log every time I want to bring the branch up to
date. I may have done the branch improperly, as I did it the first day
I was using svn. But perforces branching model is file-based, so
there's no way to do this wrong.
<mike
--
Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
