Misunderstanding (Re: Emacs-devel Digest, Vol 44, Issue 67)

["Eric S. Raymond" <esr@thyrsus.com>]

From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@ieee.org>
>         I think you first have to make your case that arch is
>  inferior. It does not change a whole lot, but what we have works just
>  fine.  Over the last year I have twice evaluate bzr and git, and found
>  that they do not support the feature set of arch that I have come to
>  rely upon -- so in my view, at least, bzr and git are the inferior
>  products. YMMV.

We've had a disconnect.  I don't actually have a strong opinion about
Arch one way or the other, other than being somewhat dubious about its
maintainence status.  (Full disclosure: from personal experience with
Tom Lord, I consider him borderline insane and possibly committable --
but I also consider that to be almost irrelevant to the issue at hand,
as having bizarre semi-delusional episodes clearly hasn't stopped him
from writing good software occasionally.)

What I was bridling at was the implication that *CVS* should be recommended
over *Subversion* just because one comes off an FSF server and the 
other doesn't.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>