[p4] Multiple clients - single user

[Didster]

Hi Greg,

Yes, I agree with that too - I also have multiple clients on a single
machine for different build situations - and as you say, would be a
bit niffed if you got charged for an extra licence just for that.

> I would also end up getting charged every time I added a new build
> machine to my network.

So do your build machines share a single user, i.e. yours?  Is that
kind of setup acceptable in that it's still you using perforce, just
from a different machine?

Thanks

On 6/15/07, Greg Whitfield <Greg.Whitfield at lightworkdesign.com> wrote:
> I'm sure nobody was accusing you of piracy.
>
> But on per-user vs per-client, I think making per "real person" is
> absolutely the right model for licenses.
>
> If I want to create a new client space to handle different development
> branch, or perhaps documentation or management information, I would not
> want to be charged for that. Or have my workflow interrupted by having
> to go through the purchasing cycle.
>

>
> Clients are about being able to organise your data in a way that suits
> your own working practices. If Perforce put up a cost barrier to prevent
> you organising things that streamline your own activities I think it
> would lose a great deal of its power and flexibility. I probably would
> not have recommended purchasing it either.
>
> Just my 10c worth.
>
> Greg
> ~~~~
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Didster [mailto:didster at gmail.com]
> Sent: 15 June 2007 11:11
> To: Greg Whitfield
> Cc: Robert Cowham; paul goffin; perforce-user at perforce.com
> Subject: Re: [p4] Multiple clients - single user
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> Thanks very much for all your responses.
>
> Just to be clear, my query was out of curiosity more than anything - we
> have already purchased a licence for 9 users which covers our current 4
> perm staff + any temps + a bit of expansion.
>
> At our company, we have been forced to use a product called Accurev for
> the last 3 years for source control [it's truly dreadful] and the cost
> of 9 user licences for perforce was worth every penny.
>
> But...  Not every "company" in the world takes software theft seriously
> - and it just seemed to me that it's a strange decision to make the
> license based on per-user rather than per-client when sharing a user
> technically is possible and presents no problems from a functional point
> of view - hence my question.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> On 6/15/07, Greg Whitfield <Greg.Whitfield at lightworkdesign.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >I loved the story of a vendor whose product was secured by a dongle
> > read at
> > >start up. After a support conversation they realised that a certain
> > customer
> > >was using the same license multiple times. It eventually turned out
> > that one
> > >chap at the customer had the job of cycling round between branch
> > offices with
> > >said dongle every morning, getting the software running on various
> > machines!
> >
> > Can't have been my software then - many moons ago when I wrote the
> > dongle checker for a program, it kept checking at random intervals,
> > and would not allow things like file-save's without a dongle.
> >
> > Still, a job title of "Dongle Cycler" has a certain ring to it :)
> >
> >
> >
>
>