[p4] Re: Perforce Configurations
kgraham at uasc-id.com
kgraham at uasc-id.com
Mon Mar 21 08:38:19 PST 2005
Paul Andrei wrote:
configuration-through-integration v.s. server-side symbolic links
-----------------------------------------------------------------
> 2. CTI is more labor intensive than symbolic links (one
> actually has to integrate the common components in all
> their client projects). On the other side, an SSSL could be
> represented as a one-line text file of a new Perforce type:
> easy to create and update.
If there are no changes in the destination, the integration can be scripted,
and essentially requires no labor. Run a script that does a forced
integration into the 5 or 50 targets and checks in the changelist.
>3. CTI consumes many Perforce server resources (metadata and
> depot disc space) while SSSL wouldn't consume any (except for
> a small file in each client project).
Because of lazy integration, all that is consumed is a bit of metadata. No
depot space is consumed.
Keith Graham
More information about the perforce-user
mailing list