Jonathan,Just googling, I haven't tried it since last year ...
Jonathan Walther wrote:
Hi Harold.
Hello, hello.
My name is Jonathan Walther, and I am the coordinator for the Xouvert project. I read your post on Slashdot yesterday, and it looks like you are responding to some of the same frustrations and desire for change that inspired the Xouvert project.
http://xouvert.org
Xouvert is using arch instead of CVS. We aren't doing this lightly; we see a clear benefit to it. One of the benefits is it's revision control discipline is more natural and makes it vastly easier to have a wide diversity of "branches" going at once, keeping in sync with each other.
Hmm... I have been looking into Xouvert since it keeps getting mentioned to me... but I still can't find anything that indicates that arch works (or would be easy to make work) on Cygwin. Could others please check the status on arch on Cygwin?
We would love to incorporate your changes, and give you and anyone you delegate full commit access to our revision control tree. Would you be interested in partnering with our project? I think we can both provide each other with a lot of positive benefits.
No action is required on your part, Xouvert is working on our first release which should be soon. Like you, we are starting with XFree86 4.3 as our base. We believe once you go through the arch tutorial, you also will be sold on it's benefits for projects like ours.
I'm sure it has benefits, but it has to compile to be useful :)
Waiting for status of arch on Cygwin report...
Harold
See this (very recent) thread:
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-arch-users/2003-10/msg00437.html
It seems it works, with some limitations, which may/may not be addressable from Cygwin's side.
BTW, arch is quite different in structure from CVS, so it's worth reading just a little bit about the architecture - I think it's a great idea
David
