Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 09 Oct 2002 17:37:22 -0700 | From | Dan Kegel <> | Subject | Re: BK is *evil* corporate software [was Re: New BK License Problem?] |
| |
Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> wrote: > if you have 3-5 developers there is no reason to not use CVS, > it works well enough. ... > OK, now let's look at it as you grow. Most of our customers are in the > 25-100 developer range. They move very quickly and have lots of parallelism > in the code. So things like work flow and merging are critical, if that > doesn't work, the whole team slows down. Let's say we have a 60 seat sale. > That's $90K/year for BK. Let's say the engineers cost $100K/each (it > may be lower where you are but it's more like $180-220 here when you add > in building/mgmt/all the other overhead). So that's $6M/year in engineers. > The BK cost is 1.5% of that. You say that your guys are $50K/year? OK, > so we're at 3% of that. The point is that if BK makes your team 3% more > productive, it costs zero. > > And none of that includes the hardware costs, which are dramatically > cheaper for BK, it works on a laptop. Clearcase doesn't.
Larry is spot on. I evaluated Clearcase, Bitkeeper, and Perforce recently for an 80 developer shop currently suffering with SourceSafe. Clearcase was ridiculously expensive and complex; I would never use it. Bitkeeper appeared to have *exactly* the features we wanted, and the price was not out of our range. We eventually settled on trying Perforce for a while because we know it could do most of what we needed, but it was a really tough call. Larry took the time to make sure we understood the issues, and I have a lot of respect for him.
Anyone who says Larry is evil is smoking crack. He's good people. - Dan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |