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

[Bruce Stephens]

"Alfred M\. Szmidt" <address@hidden> writes:

>    Are `tla-fork' and `tla-commit' your own custom scripts?
>
> tla-fork is Miles' work, tla-commit is my own.
>
>    Are they available in current tla version tarball?
>
> No.
>
>    If not, then your ``ditto for tla'' is simply not true for majority
>    of tla users...
>
> And the majority of users don't have bzr installed, so it simply isn't
> true for bzr.

I'd guess the majority of users don't have tla (or baz) installed,
either.  (They'll have CVS, and maybe in a year or two subversion.)

If they install bzr, they'll get the bahaviour described, if they
install tla, they probably won't get tla-fork and tla-commit.

Probably more significantly, the relevant tutorials probably (rightly,
IMHO) emphasize the built-in behaviours of the various tools rather
than the things that might be possible if the user is interested
enough to hunt down various scripts.

So I don't think it's unreasonable to compare how tools behave in
their default installed state, as described by their tutorials.
Comparing how scriptable the tools are is also useful information, of
course.

[...]