Interestingly enough Linus seems to prefer Monotone

Post #202,299 by bluke 4/7/05 7:22:49 AM Reply	Interestingly enough Linus seems to prefer Monotone [link\|http://lwn.net/Articles/130681/\|Linus on the BK withdrawal] "...We've been using BK for three years, and in fact, the biggest problem right now is that a number of people have gotten very very picky about their tools after having used the best. Me included, ... PS. Don't bother telling me about subversion. If you must, start reading up on "monotone". That seems to be the most viable alternative, but don't pester the developers so much that they don't get any work done. They are already aware of my problems ;)"
Post #202,300 by pwhysall 4/7/05 7:24:13 AM Reply	I think I know why... ...Arch is led by Tom Lord, who's famous for being a bit unhinged at times. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #202,303 by ben_tilly 4/7/05 8:31:19 AM Reply	That would be enough for me not to use arch Besides, doesn't arch have performance issues? Another appropriate one is darcs, but again it is slower than Linus needs. However I'd suspect that darcs (written in Haskell) could speed up more easily than arch could (mess of shell scripts last I checked). Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #202,321 by JayMehaffey 4/7/05 11:50:11 AM Reply	Seems like all of them have performance issues It appears that the single biggest problem with switching source control is that all of them have performance problems when applied to a project like Linux. Very few projects have Linux's combinatin of being a very big project and getting a huge number of small patches applied. Jay
Post #202,518 by JimWeirich 4/8/05 4:30:28 PM Reply	Re: That would be enough for me not to use arch [...] could speed up more easily than arch could (mess of shell scripts last I checked). arch has had a C based implementation for some time ... can't comment on the "mess" part. :) -- -- Jim Weirich jim@weirichhouse.org [link\|http://onestepback.org\|http://onestepback.org] --------------------------------------------------------------------- "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)

Welcome to IWETHEY!