[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2003/12/30]
So perforce is wonderful and perfect and always gets it right and everything that CVS and subversion etc are not? Bollocks. I've hit this one three times now. You have development going on in one branch, and you're integrating changes in the repository across to your stable branch. Perforce is good at handling branching, so this should all work. Perforce has numbered changesets, and you can take several changesets from one branch and integrate them as a single changeset in your stable branch. This approach makes sense when it took several tweaks in the development branch to get something stable. And nearly all the time it just works, and you believe what it says But perforce SILENTLY FAILS to work when you attempt to integrate two changes, where the first adds a file, and the second edits that file. The edit isn't integrated. Why on earth not? This is actually a depressingly common scenario - someone adds a file as part of a change, they discover some problem they didn't expect, so next thing they do is edit their new file. And the person doing the integration waits until all the dust settles down, then attempts to integrate all these "changes" together. And normally it works. But if the add/edit combination is present then Perforce fails. Silently. Bah. And if you still think Perforce is perfect, why do they write a whole FAQ about "how to back out a change" http://www.perforce.com/perforce/technotes/note014.html rather than just fixing their software to make it possible? Nicholas Clark
Generated at 19:01 on 27 Nov 2006 by mariachi 0.52