From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Eric S. Raymond" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Misunderstanding (Re: Emacs-devel Digest, Vol 44, Issue 67) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:18:19 -0400 Organization: Eric Conspiracy Secret Labs Message-ID: <20071010231818.GD1955@thyrsus.com> References: <20071010222633.B8E0A73931@grelber.thyrsus.com> Reply-To: esr@thyrsus.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1192058281 16106 80.91.229.12 (10 Oct 2007 23:18:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:18:01 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 11 01:17:58 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 1IfkoK-0004Io-Sb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:17:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfkoE-0007Q4-Np for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:17:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IfkoB-0007O3-3M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:17:43 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IfkoA-0007NY-H8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:17:42 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfkoA-0007NT-EQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:17:42 -0400 Original-Received: from static-71-162-243-5.phlapa.fios.verizon.net ([71.162.243.5] helo=snark) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IfkoA-00066w-3E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:17:42 -0400 Original-Received: by snark (Postfix, from userid 23) id 9656138032; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:18:19 -0400 (EDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071010222633.B8E0A73931@grelber.thyrsus.com> X-Eric-Conspiracy: There is no conspiracy User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11) X-Detected-Kernel: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:80562 Archived-At: From: Manoj Srivastava > 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. -- Eric S. Raymond