* Marc Haber: > Compared to SVN from the view of somebody who is acquainted with CVS, > arch sucks badly. I tend to agree with most of the things that Florian > Weimer lists on http://www.enyo.de/fw/software/arch/design-issues.html
The list is somewhat outdated, and it doesn't reflect some things I've learnt since I wrote that pamphlet. Regarding the Emacs vs VIM comment: I use both, and don't feel as restricted in either of them as I do when I use the wrong VC system. I think that this is part of the problem with current VC systems: To some extent, each of them forces a particular model on you, and in some cases, it's not even clear what this model looks like. Greg Hudson contributes an interesting viewpoint: <http://web.mit.edu/ghudson/thoughts/bitkeeper.whynot> Of course, it's a pretty lame excuse for not implementing repository replication, but I think he's right that for most free software projects, a mainline tree which is directly updated by contributors is preferable. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
