| Clearcase's (clearmake's) cloud building capability sounds nice, but I have to pile on to this: > I'd say set the gold standard for version control and dependency tracking and nothing today comes close to it. In my 2005-2011 experience with Clearcase, it was slow and required dedicated developers just to manage the versions, and I'm so happy its version control model has been an evolutionary dead-end in the greater developer community. The MVFS is an attractive trap. Giving people the ability to trivially access older versions means you've just outsourced the job of keeping everything working together to some poor SOB. It was very much a "enough rope to hang yourself" kind of design. As I said, it was slow, because MVFS. The recommended solution from Clearcase/IBM was to break up the source tree into different volumes (or whatever Clearcase's "repo"-analogue was named), which just increased the pain of keeping things in sync. Additionally, it was an "ask-permission" design for modifying files, where you had to checkout a file before being able to modify it, and you couldn't checkout if someone else had, which added a ton of painful overhead. I'll grant that my company/group didn't know what they were doing, but following IBM/Clearcase's guidance was not a good idea. These days, I use Clearcase as a warning to the younger generation. |