On 2008-08-26 at 23:37 -0700, Joshua Juran wrote:
> What I hate the most is that everybody still uses Perforce anyway[1],
> even though the deficiencies don't get addressed[2], even when much
> better free alternatives exist, due I guess to inertia and the cost
> of switching.
For certain ty
On Aug 27, 2008, at 08:37, Joshua Juran wrote:
[2] How do you reverse a submitted change?
FWIW: http://encodo.com/en/blogs.php?entry_id=86
See how easy?
--
Marco Von Ballmoos
http://earthli.com - Home of the earthli WebCore; PHP web sites made
simple.
On Aug 27, 2008, at 12:56, Peter da Silva wrote:
Perforce is the Windows of version control.
I thought Microsoft Visual SourceSafe was the Windows of version
control.
+1
--
Marco Von Ballmoos
http://earthli.com - Home of the earthli WebCore; PHP web sites made
simple.
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 05:17:20AM -0700, Joshua Juran wrote:
> On Aug 27, 2008, at 3:56 AM, Peter da Silva wrote:
>
> >>Perforce is the Windows of version control.
> >
> >I thought Microsoft Visual SourceSafe was the Windows of version
> >control.
>
> No, DOS.
the DOS solution (which some of
On Aug 27, 2008, at 3:56 AM, Peter da Silva wrote:
Perforce is the Windows of version control.
I thought Microsoft Visual SourceSafe was the Windows of version
control.
No, DOS.
Josh
Perforce is the Windows of version control.
I thought Microsoft Visual SourceSafe was the Windows of version
control.
I *hate* centralized version control.
I most especially hate the kind that gets in the way of you doing crap
when you haven't got connectivity with the server. The worst offenders
of course are horrorshows like ClearCase, but Perforce isn't so hot
either.
-josh
On 27 Aug 2008, at 07:37, Joshua Juran wrote:
Perforce does not have branches.
The notion of a "branch" of development is implemented in different
ways by different SCM tools. For me, CVS' invisible branching scares
the hell out of me - it's too easy to get non-sticky stuff mixed with
st
e, they're glorified macros.
Actually, macros would be a better system than Perforce branch
views. You could define a shell variable for each "branch", and then
"p4 integrate $foo $bar" (which is no less readable than "p4
integrate -b foo-bar"), and the reve
