On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 10:03 +1000, Michael G Schwern wrote: > Of course you don't need branching, merging is hard so you've never branched. > Of course you don't revert, reversions are hard so you don't revert. Of > course you don't make tiny commits, every commit is inflicted on the whole > project, so you make enormous commits when it's totally ready. This is all > twisting your brain to fit you version control system
That is the entire problem in a nutshell, thank you. This why I hate p4, because it still pushes this broken model. In fact it pushes a bad version of the broken model, worse than SVN (which to be fair on SVN is probably the best implementation of the broken model). p4 additionally suffers from a split-brain problem of the server thinking it knows what is on your filesystem rather than having the good sense to go look. It has the stupid "configspec" concept that makes checking out another working copy more effort than it should be. It has other crap features too. Ok, p4 is not the worst, it does do atomic commits and it isn't ClearCase. You know it's 2011 now and I'm not excited by atomic commits, it's like saying "this backup system is designed not to lose my data" - no shit! On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 11:45 +0000, Neil Brewitt wrote: > Anyone who hates perforce is a victim of bad education s/hates/likes/ > It's faster, it's safer, it's lighter. It just works. p4 is not fast. Really, no it's not. Faster than XYZ for some values of XYZ maybe but not fast. Lighter? Right yes than what, bloody clearcase with its kernel module and own filesystem implementation? Yes ok. Please wait 5 seconds while I set up a full p4 client/server environment. It just works, yes, it does just about work. Most of the time. Except for when the server gets confused about what's on the client and eats my changes. That's just like a backup system that does lose my data and I don't like it. > Reverts too difficult for you? Then don't revert changes. Use the > software how it's meant to be used. You know I really thought your original reply was satire until you replied to Tony! I also laughed when I read it! On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 19:22 +0100, Marco Von Ballmoos wrote: > That's the thing about hating software: is the thing you hate about it > hateful enough that it makes you stop using it or do you just adjust > and move on? For some, the ability to be able to quickly and easily > back out foolhardy commits is more important than adjusting developer > workflow to stop making said commits. I don't hate it enough to go find a new job so like everyone else I just have to knowingly or unknowingly work around the tool on a routine basis. At least in my case I can clearly see where it is detrimental to the workflow, slowing down development and developer interaction, preventing us from working in a more efficient manner, and increasing chance of bugs as a result. Cheers, Martin
