[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > See yesterday(1) and history(1). As Ron said, that's not really sufficient. You loose a lot with the dump filesystem; log messages, branching, granularity, etc. It's an answer, but not a universally good one. But, more to the point, snappy one-liners like the above just smack of elitism and don't convey any real information. Just because it's not the fashionable way to do something in the Plan 9 world doesn't mean it may not be necessary due to circumstances beyond an individual's control. Yeah, I've done enough elitist bitching in my time, too, but ultimately, did anyone benefit? Not really.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 04:18:36PM -0700, Ronald G Minnich wrote: > CVS is ok. > > The xen guys use mercurial now, which is written in python, and seems to > work well. Could this python system be ported to python on plan 9? I like Subversion; it's a decent tool and has a textual on-disk representation reminescent of RCS files. It appears to be, ``CVS done right.'' Sure, some things are suboptimal, but on the whole, it's pleasant enough to work with. But it requires the Apache runtime, which I guess would be non-trivial to port (because it's big and requires more patience than I have). Personally, I'd like to see ports of unison and subversion to Plan 9. That'd make me a happy guy. Of course, I'd also like to have a machine running Plan 9 again. That'd also make me a happy guy. Oh yeah, and time to mess with it, too. And time to reply to people who try and help me out of 9fans (hi, Erik!). Mainly, it's a time thing. - Dan C.