Hi,
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 09:38:27AM +0200, David MENTRE wrote:
> It appears that we have about 10 Axiom developers, with 10 different
> SCM (Bill: Darcs; Tim: Arch, CVS; Gabriel: SVN; me: patch, Arch (never
> again, Mercurial/SVN/SVK under study), Antoine: SVK; Ralf: Arch; Mike:
> CVS?, ...).
"David MENTRE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Hello,
|
| 2006/3/30, Antoine Hersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| > What about SVK( http://svk.elixus.org/ ), it seem to be based on
| > Subversion plus distributed a la Arch
| > It is based on PERL a more reasonable dependency that Haskell.
|
| I am on SV
Hello,
2006/3/30, Antoine Hersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> What about SVK( http://svk.elixus.org/ ), it seem to be based on
> Subversion plus distributed a la Arch
> It is based on PERL a more reasonable dependency that Haskell.
I am on SVK's mailing list for several months now. SVK is interesting
Hello,
What about SVK( http://svk.elixus.org/ ), it seem to be based on
Subversion plus distributed a la Arch
It is based on PERL a more reasonable dependency that Haskell.
I have never used it( RCS cover most of my need), so it is just
presenting another option.
Antoine Hersen
__
On March 29, 2006 9:24 PM Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>
> root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> | What exactly do you advocate and why?
>
> SVN.
>
> In many aspects that I care about directly for working on Axiom,
> I find it a better tool than tla.
>
darcs.
I find it a better tool tha
root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
| What exactly do you advocate and why?
SVN.
In many aspects that I care about directly for working on Axiom, I
find it a better tool than tla.
-- Gaby
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.o
> Thanks - that would definitely bypass the problem when next I get the
> time to work on Axiom. Would it be possible for you to merge all the
> Windows work back into CVS?
I'll bring it up with Bill who maintains that branch. --t
___
Axiom-developer
cool. I'll look into the vmplayer solution. --t
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
>
> You have a problem with an open source tool.
> You have the source.
> You have the skill.
> Fix the code and send the patches to arch.
Why waste my time on something that goes against what I think is the
best policy and that I believe doesn't need to be done?
> It is, after all, exactly what
> These are hard problems (at least for me) and it all takes time.
You're a hard worker! I recently ran LTK 0.78 on Windows with GCL 2.7.0
but the latest 0.8x defeated the GCL compiler.
One other interesting note is that following a lead in a message on
C.L.L I recently tried running Debian with
> I am also saying that Arch is useless on Windows.
>
> Believe me, if you don't like tla on Unix platforms, you would abhor it
> under Windows. The only way I was able to undo the mess it made of my
> file system under Cygwin (exacerbated I admit by a network domain change
> which stuffed up) wa
> Just as a friendly suggestion over the back garden fence, rather than
> trying to fit a square peg into a round hole by making Axiom X based on
> Windows, wouldn't your time (as a well regarded highly productive and
> uncommonly competent lisp programmer) be better spent either:
>
>i) pickin
> The lack of upkeep on the server copy of a branch seems to be
> completely independent of the issue of which maintenance
> system to use.
I'm arguing precisely against the shunting aside of separate subprojects
to which Arch's alleged capabilities contributed. I see both processes
as therefore
PS.
> the X-on-windows effort,
Just as a friendly suggestion over the back garden fence, rather than
trying to fit a square peg into a round hole by making Axiom X based on
Windows, wouldn't your time (as a well regarded highly productive and
uncommonly competent lisp programmer) be better spent
> > The only "subprojects" in the axiom project are specific
> > branches that have been created to separate various
> > developers who planned to work on separate threads. These do
> > not impact the main branch in any way until the work is
> > complete and I merge the two branches. For exampl
Hi Tim.
> The only "subprojects" in the axiom project are specific
> branches that have been created to separate various
> developers who planned to work on separate threads. These do
> not impact the main branch in any way until the work is
> complete and I merge the two branches. For exampl
Mike,
> I want to say that tla/GNU arch is not at all looking good as a source
> control system (it's problematic on Windows and looks like it is barely
> alive as an on-going project) and I would suggest dropping it as a tool
> for the Axiom project.
I'm currently working on projects that use CV
Hi Ralf.
> what do you want to say by your comment?
I want to say that tla/GNU arch is not at all looking good as a source
control system (it's problematic on Windows and looks like it is barely
alive as an on-going project) and I would suggest dropping it as a tool
for the Axiom project.
I am
Mike,
what do you want to say by your comment?
Ralf
On 03/29/2006 06:47 AM, Mike Thomas wrote:
Hi all.
Why don't you use tla?
See the section "Criticisms" on:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Arch
and then the amount of work going on at:
http://arch.sv.gnu.org/archives/gnu-arch
19 matches
Mail list logo
