Re: [Gnu-arch-users] programming in the large (Re: On configs and huge source trees)

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Tom,

I tend to agree with your mail overall.

I do agree with Alfred as well when he notes that your (almost) one-man
efforts to provide new build tools and a C library, however interesting,
did not contribute to the harmonization of the GNU system. `tla' in
particular seems to very loosely follow the GCS which I find a
pity---likewise, I find it pitiful that it's really called `tla' instead
of GNU Arch, that's again counter-harmonizing.

However, I find your ``side-projects'' like `package-framework', parts
of `hackerlab', `pika', `awiki', etc. interesting.  But I agree with
James when he says you can't fight on every front at the same time.

Thomas Lord <address@hidden> writes:

> In any event there's the Arch 2.0 direction, gathering dust on a shelf.
> No matter how many times Matthieu calls it a "complete rewrite" that
> doesn't make it true.  *`revc'* is, indeed, a completely newly coded
> storage manager.   It does replace one part of Arch but not the rest.
> It can do things like give git-like speed for commits and filename-based
> tree comparisons.  It rests for want of resources to port inventory and
> merging features from tla.

I'm not familiar with the `tla' code base but I think it'd be quite
insightful if you could explain how according to you such a new storage
model could be plugged in GNU Arch, technically.

Thanks,
Ludovic.