Re: Gud lord!

[Robert Anderson <rwa@alumni.princeton.edu>]

On Sat, 2003-06-07 at 14:05, Miles Bader wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 09:43:25AM -0700, Robert Anderson wrote:
> > To be handcuffed by a revision control system which is unable to sanely
> > rename a file - in the year 2003 - seems absurd to me.
> 
> Please call back when there's actually a _stable_ and well-supported
> alternative; currently neither arch nor subversion are.

Define "stable."  I've been using arch without data loss for over a year
on a code base of over a half a million lines.

I'm also curious what you mean by "well supported."  I can't think of a
free software project in existence that has a more dedicated maintainer
than arch does.

> CVS may suck rocks in many ways, but changing this is not something to be
> done lightly.

Certainly not.  I wouldn't suggest a wholesale change to any system, not
matter how "stable."  I would suggest a gateway maintainer for a CVS
head "mirror" in an arch archive, with transition to arch happening
relatively slowly as people learn the system and its benefits at their
own pace.

http://arch.fifthvision.net/bin/view/Main/InteroperatingWithCVS

There is one legitimate complaint, however:  there is no Windows
support, and probably won't be anytime soon.

Bob