The following pages aim at taking a look at the possibilities for ClearCase and Subversion co-existence in the sense that the same code base should be able to be maintained in essentially both repositories. By implementing that development teams could use the tool that suits them best.
Both systems have their forces - and some drawbacks. ClearCase tends to be the dinosaur, although quite capable - ClearCase can do almost anything you can imagine a Version Control System (VCS) should be able to - but it comes with at price. A substantial cost of ownership - and for users coming from other systems, the learning curve often surprises.
On the other hand Subversion is quite simple to start working with, although some of the features required by VCS's are less mature - branching and merging for instance.
So for any organisation or development team that are missing features from the "other" system, it will be benificial to have access to either system, so developers can work the way they like, and other teams or the organisation can stick to the company policy - if the tool selection is a policy, after all they are just tools. It is the way we use the tools that brings the bonus to the organisation. The ability to use both products side by side is also a plus if an transition from one tool to the other is the focus. Shifting all development activities from on tool to the other over night - big bang monday morning - puts more stress on the process, than nessecary, if you can move from one tool to the other, when you are ready.
So the ability to keep the repositories of both tools synchronized is interesting.
In theory that ought to be a relatively simple thing to do, and it can be achieved with more less complicated. Either manually or with tools, some tools are even automated, so I have been investing all three approaches.
But let's take a look at what the different approaches are offering.