[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: address@hidden: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tla1.2 on cygwin]
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: address@hidden: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tla1.2 on cygwin] |
Date: |
Wed, 10 Mar 2004 01:23:49 -0800 (PST) |
> From: Aaron Bentley <address@hidden>
> Tom Lord wrote:
> > > From: Aaron Bentley <address@hidden>
> > > For archives, I can understand incompatible changes aren't
> > > happening any time soon. Would changes to the revlib structure
> > > be permissible?
> >Permissible? Sure. But why, exactly?
> I still find myself needing to manually kill revisions in revlibs on
> occasion, and it's awkward to navigate those directories.
Presumably that depends on what tools you use. My experience is the
opposite.
But regardless, this seems like at most a minor issue.
> It would also reduce tla's dependency on long path names.
Given the very limited set of systems for which that's an issue, I'm
interested in solutions that _don't_ perturb existing code, revlibs,
etc.
> If a new version of the Arch format was made, we could apply
> those changes at the same time.
But there's no good reason yet for any format changes.
-t