Tony Mechelynck, 14.11.2008: > > On 14/11/08 18:03, Matt Wozniski wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Tony Mechelynck wrote: > >> You can also use patches even if you don't want to use gif (sic) > > > > Of course you can - you can do all of your programming without version > > control, but why would you want to! Seriously, the idea isn't to > > force people to change their ways, but to make it easier for those who > > don't want to spend their time collecting patches and patching the > > source themselves. > > > > ~Matt > > Well, one reason could be that Vim SVN lags behind by a noticeable time > delay (days, sometimes weeks);
I only compile Vim since about one year. I'm very satisfied with the svn repository and can't remember on a delay of over a week during this year. Mostly it's between one and three days. But are you really affected by each bug that you need all the fixes immediately? > another reason could be that you don't > know where to get a version of the appropriate version-control software > for your OS. You don't really mean that, do you? It's not harder and not easier as finding the patch program for your OS. > Seriously, the "patch" program is so easy to use (in most cases, after a The "John Doe" editor is so easy to use > cd to the right directory, "patch -p0 <patchfilename" is enough, > replacing of course "patchfilename" by the patch file name, possibly > with path) that I can understand quite well that people wouldn't want to > spend their time learning how to use a particular version-control a particular editor > package, especially now that (even outside of the Vim world) people > apparently can't agree on whether to use CVS, SVN, gif, Mercurial or vi, emacs Markus --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
