On 10/11/07, Jonathan Ben Avraham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is no built-in development framework in SVN like there is in > ClearCase UCM.
Agreed, but you've also mentioned that developers rarely take the time to understand ClearCase. In the army, we also tried to implement UCM (the 'multiple development streams + delivering to integration stream' deal) and it was regarded as overhead without benefits. Then again, ours was a team of 5 developers. For example, we pretty much gave up on orderly use of UCM activities and delivering activities separately, since we soon found out UCM activities easily become inter-dependent and thus not really separable. (Yes, I understand why they become interdependent -- it makes sense, but it doesn't mean the UCM model works.) Jonathan, did you see it work better in a larger setup? P.S. I'm still standing behind my claim about horrible performance (and we had decent hardware in the army rollout).
