Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: hmm. an alternative to a new maintainer. Hire your manager.

[Miles Bader]

2005/10/18, Matthieu Moy <address@hidden>:
> 1) Teach a beginner how to use baz or tla. See how long it takes.
> 2) Run "baz status" in a large tree. See how long it takes.
>
> In both cases, most other modern RCS beat GNU Arch by an order of
> magnitude. This doesn't remove the numerous qualities of Arch, but
> it's just that we know it's possible to do better.

Sure, tla/arch is full of these stupid little implementation problems,
though they're not bad enough in practice to put much urgency in my
search for a replacement[*].

I've love a modern RCS that takes the good points of arch and fixes
the problems, a net improvement.  But that's not what I find when I
look around; I find a bunch of RCSs that improve on some of tla's
annoying points -- and add stupid boners of their own (like git's
creaky rename resolution strategy).

[*] However I do not use tla on truly large source trees like the
kernel or gcc -- Emacs is the biggest.  For really large trees I use
diff/patch.

-Miles
--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.