Stephen Leake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If we are declaring DVC support for tla dead, that simplifies the fix. > It also simplifies cleaning up the texinfo manual; we can simply start > over. > > Do we still want to support arch, but by some other dvc back-end?
I'd prefer that we did not declare arch support dead. Emacs still uses
it (via Miles Bader's bi-directional repo, which he syncs with the
official CVS repo). I continue to use it for some of my own projects,
as well. Also, until DVC has a 1.0 release, at least, it would be best
to support the single backend that Xtla supported, to ensure a smooth
migration to DVC.
--
Michael Olson -- FSF Associate Member #652 |
http://mwolson.org/ -- Jabber: mwolson_at_hcoop.net | /` |\ | | |
Sysadmin -- Hobbies: Lisp, GP2X, HCoop | |_] | \| |_|
Projects: Emacs, Muse, ERC, EMMS, ErBot, DVC, Planner |
pgpWtOF6tPaog.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Dvc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/dvc-dev
