[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