[ On Friday, June 8, 2001 at 14:25:54 (-0400), Donald Sharp wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Use of CVS on large scales
>
> well hopefully. I wasn't specific enough in what I was talking about
> above. I said 100 developers. I should have really said
> Large scale development( 100's to thousands of developers, 30+k
> files, millions of lines of codes, 500+k revisions, hundreds of
> branches ).
I can certainly understand how hundreds of active branches with many
developers could begin to cause access contention issues with CVS.
> I don't like comparing something that isn't even released( and
> BitKeeper has been almost released for a long time now ) to
> existing systems. In any event BitKeeper sounds good,
> but I don't count it towards anything until I can get a copy
> in my hand and use it.
I know the feeling! ;-)
> I was unaware of BitKeepers multi-site capabilities though,
> guess I'm gonna have to go check out it's web pages...
The multi-site capabilities of BitKeeper are inherent in the way it
allows any developer to take a copy of the repo and work on change sets
independently of any central repo. In fact with the right development
model/process I'd guess that you could simply eliminate any central repo
completely.
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Planix, Inc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Secrets of the Weird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
