[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?
From: |
David MENTRE |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate? |
Date: |
Sun, 07 Mar 2004 15:48:48 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Hello David,
I'm a new Arch user. I'm using it on two projects. As I am new to arch,
I can give my version of Arch usability.
"David A. Wheeler" <address@hidden> writes:
> Hi - I've been trying to understand various SCM tools
> (primarily CVS, Subversion, and Arch), and
> ended up putting my thoughts down in an article:
> http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/scm.html
I've quickly read your article. I think you emphasize to much on small
details (like the "tla mv" vs. "tla move" issue). And you should not
mess with arch maintained {arch} directory, so why so much fuss about
bash bug on shell completion?
As a new Arch user (and old CVS user), I only know 2-3 commands
(typically "commit") and need to look at documentation for more
complicated things. Naming the command "del", "rm" or "remove" doesn't
change anything.
The most three important points I would mentioned:
1. Arch desperately needs a well structured, well cross-referenced,
user manual with complete help for each command, *as well* as a how
to section on doing simple and more tricky things (for both tla 1.1
and 1.2). Both the tutorial and the wiki are useful, but they're not
structured enough.
(as a side note, I know that I should contribute such a manual
following the spirit of free software. But I have no time to do this
right now);
2. Arch is very simple to setup for public archive. No need for a
server software. I just used a mirror of my local archive with sftp
URL. It is very very convenient;
3. an official Windows port is necessary. Not being a native port would
not be a difficult point (windows shell is so limited that you need
cygwin anyway).
Yours,
david
--
David Mentré <address@hidden>
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, Brian May, 2004/03/08
- [Gnu-arch-users] Caching (was: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?), Stefan Monnier, 2004/03/10
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Caching (was: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?), Jan Hudec, 2004/03/14
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Caching (was: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?), Stefan Monnier, 2004/03/14
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Caching (was: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?), Jan Hudec, 2004/03/14
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Caching (was: GNU Arch review - am I accurate?), Stefan Monnier, 2004/03/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Caching, Aaron Bentley, 2004/03/15
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, Charles Duffy, 2004/03/08
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?,
David MENTRE <=
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, David A. Wheeler, 2004/03/07
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch review - am I accurate?, David A. Wheeler, 2004/03/09