Re: [Gnu-arch-users] subversion vs. cvs (vs. arch) over on pgsql-hackers

[Dustin Sallings]

On Mar 25, 2004, at 19:14, James Blackwell wrote:

> I'm wondering if you read me correctly. I'm saying that arch is
> currently perfectly willing and able to work in a centralized archive,
> where two or more developers push and pull from the same archive.

	Yes, my point is that I tend to want to tell people that that's not 
``the arch way,'' etc...  Unfortunately, telling them that it's not 
``the arch way'' just makes it sound like it can't do it.  It certainly 
can work quite well, but it seems that with projects like postgresql, 
it really doesn't make sense.

> I think that a lot of people get tricked. Arch is so incredibly good at
> handling decentralized development, that few ever realize that arch is
> *perfectly* capable at handling centralized development as well!

	Yeah, it's more general than that.  People think it's all complicated 
because you can do all of these things you can't do in other systems.  
Because it's so full of features, people believe it must also be hard 
to use.

--
SPY                      My girlfriend asked me which one I like better.
pub  1024/3CAE01D5 1994/11/03 Dustin Sallings <address@hidden>
|    Key fingerprint =  87 02 57 08 02 D0 DA D6  C8 0F 3E 65 51 98 D8 BE
L_______________________ I hope the answer won't upset her. ____________