From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jason Rumney Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Policy issue in the VC manual -- recommending CVS?!? Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:14:18 +0100 Message-ID: <470D40AA.6020400@gnu.org> References: <20071010204508.025F538032@snark> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1192050898 25188 80.91.229.12 (10 Oct 2007 21:14:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:14:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Eric S. Raymond" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 10 23:14:57 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Ifit9-000696-9e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:14:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ifit1-0005oF-4P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:14:35 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ifisw-0005in-O7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:14:30 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ifisu-0005ar-AU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:14:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ifist-0005aV-8Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:14:27 -0400 Original-Received: from outmail1.freedom2surf.net ([194.106.33.237]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ifiss-00061o-NX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:14:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [127.0.0.1] (i-83-67-23-108.freedom2surf.net [83.67.23.108]) by outmail1.freedom2surf.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CB2D50242; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:14:23 +0100 (BST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) In-Reply-To: <20071010204508.025F538032@snark> X-Detected-Kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:80540 Archived-At: Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Recommending GNU arch is dubious considering Arch's poorly-maintained > and poorly-documented state. If I'm not mistaken, Arch has been > effectively moribund since about 2003. > I think you're mistaken. Savannah lists the last release as July last year. > Recommending CVS is well beyond dubious into outright ridiculous. > Like it or not, CVS is stable, and widely used. Its "problems" are widely exaggerated by adherents to the latest wave of version control religions. > No recommendations at all would be better than these. Who decides > what the manual recommends? If it's "the last person to care", I'm > going to nuke these in a nanosecond. Arch is part of GNU