develooper Front page | perl.bootstrap | Postings from July 2000

Re: Perforce vs CVS

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Nick Ing-Simmons
Date:
July 26, 2000 07:20
Subject:
Re: Perforce vs CVS
Message ID:
200007261419.PAA06814@gabrielle.tiuk.ti.com
Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:
>
>Er... CVS has done branching and three-way merging since the beginning of
>CVS; that was one of the whole original points behind CVS.  So I guess I'm
>missing the thrust of this point of Perforce.  I've been curious for a bit
>what makes Perforce so much better too, so I'd love to hear more.
>
>Is it just that three-way merges are easier/better?  How so?

The three way merges are a tad worse than GNU three-way merge.

Perforce's strengths are SPEED and ease of setup.

-- 
Nick Ing-Simmons


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About