Hi, Matthieu Moy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bazaar has clever algorithms to chose which full tree > revision to start with (a cachedrev, the initial import, or in your > revision library), but that's relatively deep changes, I don't think > this will ever be merged into tla. You pointed out several times nice features that were implemented in baz but required deep changes. In his maintainership announcement, Andi said he would rather be "conservative" with respect to what would got merged into tla. I think it would be nice to define more precisely this level of conservatism, and in particular, to define a rationale as to what can go in and what cannot. This also raises the question of which branch is technically the best choice to start with: tla 1.3? tla 1.4? baz 1.x? It seems that a number of tla supporters had _technical_ griefs against the features that were put into baz and it might help to summarize them and discuss them (again, from a technical viewpoint ;-)). Same for tla 1.4 which Thomas apparently disliked. Thanks, Ludovic. _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
