begin quoting Andrew Lentvorski as of Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 01:58:20PM -0700: > Stewart Stremler wrote: > > >I think everyone does a little bit. But some groups do it more than > >others; one of these days I should look at the CVS code "in anger", > >just to see how hard it would be to add some features... > > > >(Versioning directories? Shouldn't be hard. Same for renames. Same > >for offline/laptop use. I don't care about atomic commits, as 99% of > >the time I commit one or two files, so that's not an itch for me, > >but a global commit count might be interesting, especially if it can > >be used an a $CommitNumber$ tag...) > > My advice. Don't. > > A) Subversion does 90%+ of what you want
Subversion eliminates itself with it's dependencies, and then with the attitude that comes along with 'em. I won't play that game, and "well, stop whining and download the binary then, pansy" is the sort of attitude I do not care to be associated with. (I also don't use OO.o at home for the same reason.) If perforce was open-source and as easy to compile as CVS, I still wouldn't abandon CVS entirely. > B) Snapshots are not quite the right abstraction > > Snapshots are a deceptively simple 85% solution. And then you hit the > last 15% and realize that you can't get to the rest. Um.... I've never even smelled that mythical 15%. > Take a *long* look at the svn, Eliminated due to dependency hell and developer attitude. > mercurial, Never tried. I should try it out. > arch, I've successfully used it _once_, but I didn't quite grasp the underlying abstractions. It seems very clunky in practice. > and darcs development IIRC, darcs depends on haskell. I had to compile haskell myself, which wasn't a problem, but to compile it, I had to hack at the code in quite unsafe ways. I don't trust haskell, so I can't trust anything built on it. > mailing lists before you consider this. Especially arch(tla?), Tom MORE mailing lists? I suppose I could give up the perforce mailing list. I don't read most of the articles, on account of most of the contributors being inveterate top-posters, rendering the digests incomprehensible. > Lord(arch/tla) is far too histrionic, but his points have merit, and > there are generally links to the other lists where they discuss patch > theory. The git, darcs, arch, and mercurial folks are all dancing > around some hard problems and trying to get them right. It's not easy. Noted. I need to get tla up and running again anyway. I have GST 2.2b to download and compile. -- _ |\_ \| -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
