as an example of the GNU system, and as a template for how
GNU packages are written. Does that sound like a fair summary?
I'm afraid I don't really understand the distinction you're drawing.
At any rate, GNU packages are (and always have been) developed in more
than one way. This is a good thing. In the case at hand, the added
complications of dVC are not worth the benefits for all projects. One
technical benefit of bzr (as far as I know) is that it can be used as a
*non*-distributed VC. Or maybe you guys consider that a drawback, I
don't know ... :).
k
