Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit

[Davide Libenzi]

On Sun, 5 Oct 2003, Tom Lord wrote:

>     > From: Davide Libenzi <address@hidden>
>
>     > Come on Tom. I've never used BK but I did read a lot of its features (I
>     > don't think they advertise bogus things). It's a pretty nice SCM and the
>     > fact that its license sucks does not lower its technical value.
>
> No, the fact that it's just SCCS-on-steroids and cost _way_ _way_ too
> much to develop for what it does lowers its technical value.   The
> fact that a bunch of shell scripts, cranked out in about 90 days and
> converted to C in about 90 days, can compete with that crappy
> SCCS-on-steroids-blowhard-promoted-"solution" lowers its technical
> value.

I hope you're smart enough to not believe to numbers Larry shot about
developement costs. Even if you have to understand that BK is not only the
core, but there're a bunch of GUI/integration tools to be accounted in the
check. We are not talking about money here though, and if you take a step
aside you can't not recognize that BK did the right steps toward
distributed development. It's hard to believe that suddendly a huge number
of pretty smart engineers in lkml decided to go with BK. And believe me,
many of the ones that are currently using BK do not really love LM.



> There's been a huge amount of bitchiness and whining on this list
> lately but the subtext of it is: "hey, this thing solves nearly
> everything -- let's just tweak X".
>
> And if you read the bitchiness critically, nearly in all cases, the
> experienced users are pointing out "Well, X has already been tweaked
> -- you just don't grok it yet."

I do use Arch by explicitly tagging files and this works for me. And this
will be the rule that I will eventually impose to my dev team. They're
already used to do add/del (mov it's new for them) and the "thing" is
symmetric respect to binary/text files.



- Davide