[p4] Use "workspace" instead of "client"

Rick Macdonald rickm at vsl.com
Mon Oct 22 17:23:36 PDT 2001


On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Jeff A. Bowles wrote:

> On Robert Cowham's poll:
> 
> At 01:11 PM 10/22/2001 -0700, Paul Cody wrote:
> >Absolutely yes.  I would estimate that the word "client" accounts for at
> >least a few hours of unproductive confusion for each new Perforce user.  I'd
> >say that adds a hundred bucks or so onto the real per-user cost of Perforce.
> 
> I use the term "client workspace" almost always when
> working with people, and that helps a lot.

I use the term "client workspace" as well. In a sense, "client" is
redundant in this phrase, because there is only one kind of workspace, and
it's on the machine where you run the p4 client.  :-)

Of course, whereas "client workspace" is a directory structure on a disk,
"client spec" is perforce server metadata (view mappings, etc).

What about the existing terms "depot view" and "client view (of depot)"?
"client view" would become "workspace view"?

So now we'll talk about "workspaces" and "workspace specs" instead of
"clients" and "client specs"?

Whereas currently "client" refers to both diskspace and depot metadata,
now "workspace" will refer to both diskspace and depot metadata? 

This doesn't sound like much of a change to me!

Whereas "depot view" is the entire depot, "client view" is that part of
the depot visible to client programs (using a given ClientSpec). A
ClientSpec tells perforce clients what and how and where to do things.

"Perforce client programs use the ClientSpec to map files from the depot
to my workspace."

I think that sentence is clear. I think ClientSpec and "client view"
are OK. And, therefore, "p4 client" and "p4 clients" and "p4 -c" are OK.

Is the problem really just that people (and the documentation) call
workspace disk (and workspace machines) "clients"?

...RickM...







More information about the perforce-user mailing list