Good SCMs (no marketing fluf, just the goods, the 3 first recommended by
Brad Appleton in the XP group)
AccuRev
BitKeeper (true pier to pier architecture)
Perforce
SubVersion

I will definitively not list ClearCase in the lot and it is my company
standard ;-(. It has stagnated for ever and now the 4 I am previously
mentioned have more features, better performance and a lower cost of
ownership than CC:
Things missing in CC:
Atomic checkout/update/commit
Fast mass operations: the cost of operation is proportional to the output
not to the data size (notorious with CC: as you grow you repository your
mass operations like update becomes slower. This isn't the case in any for
them). In subversion you do an update without any change in the rep, the
update comes back immediately. With a $300K CC vob server and a 4K files
snapshot view will take CC a 1mn30 to update even though nothing was
changed! Talk about continuous integration!

This is in the decreasing order of price BTW. Obviously when SubVersion
comes out it will be a sweet thing. The great CVS Explorer integration
(www.tortoisecvs.org) is being rewritten for SubVersion. That integration
beats CC poor NT shell integration.

Just my 2 c
"Neil Thorne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Does anyone know of a source control system that can cope with refactoring
package names and file names? In VSS when you change the name of a file and
search through revisions for that file name you only see the revisions with
the new file name!!

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Thrys�e [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 10:44 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: A feature I'd really love


Hi,

I think that CVS integraton into IntelliJ is really great to have.

What would be even better, is to enhance the CVS support to be more
'intelligent' as many other features in IntelliJ are.

More specifically the following would be very useful for me for everyday
use:

- A 'wizard' like interface for committing in several branches (that
would be comitting in one, and merging into the rest) including
interface to resolve conflicts during merge, etc. That's quite
cumbersome to do as it is now (or am I missing something?)
- General knowledge of my CVS repository. That way various stuff, like
branch names for instance, could be selected from drop-down boxes or such.
- Revision overview: A tree structure or such that could give an
overview of which revisions a fil exists in, what the log messages where
for each, etc.


I also submitted this in the Tracker.


-dennis

_______________________________________________
Eap-features mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.jetbrains.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-features


**********************************************************************
This email is intended only for the addressee. This email
and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential
or privileged information. If you are not the named
addressee or the person responsible for delivering the
message to the named addressee, please contact
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

This email has been scanned by MIMEsweeper.

**********************************************************************



_______________________________________________
Eap-features mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.jetbrains.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-features

Reply via email to