On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 03:17:48PM -0600, EvilTypeGuy wrote:
> What's so oddly scary is that bitkeeper is now being used for the Linux
> kernel, it looks as if Torvalds has begun to do his development through
> it...

Well, bitkeeper is a little like arch, so it is better suited to what
we're doing with it.


> >   And despite CVSgui (WinCVS) being best described by all as a smelly
> >   flaming turd, it is far more convenient for win32 users than opening
> >   up a dos box for command line CVS.  MacOS Classic users don't even
> >   have that option, they must use CVSgui.  Subversion is command line
> >   only at this time, making it a great burden for our win32
> >   developers, and if we plan to support MacOS Classic in the future,
> >   we can't use it.
> 
> Considering I also code in win32, and I can't even *run* WinCVS, (even
> versions I compile myself). It is *indeed* a flaming bag of dog poo. As
> such, I find it hardly convenient. Also, what win32 coders? :) At last
> check I was the only one who did anything in windows except Vic :p
> Besides that, the availability of a GUI tool *should not* determine
> acceptance of a particular program considering that functionality is far
> more valuable...

You, Vic, Elric, possibly others in time.


> >   circles, arch may as well.  But for now, love it or hate it (and
> >   most of us DO hate it), CVS is still the only tool that we can
> >   really use.
> 
> It appears so :/ I do agree if only because subversion hasn't hit 1.0
> yet...

Actually, I'm more concerned with Apache 2.  Berkeley DB 4 and Apache 2
are significant failure points, but I understand the former to be pretty
solid already (and most things still use 2 and 3 for now.)  Apache 2 gives
us a dependency on an unproven web server.  Given the ridiculous amounts
of importance we have to place on Apache, we need it solid.  I'll probably
give it about a month after it appears in sid.  If by then Apache 2 looks
to be stable, then I'll withdraw my largest objection to Subversion.

-- 
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>          You want fries with that?
 
* shortc wants to get in one of knghtbrd's sigs one of these days.

Attachment: msg00898/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to