[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: DARCS

From: Stig Brautaset
Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: DARCS
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 23:23:07 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Sep 07 2003, Ethan wrote:
> {arch} and .arch-ids are no worse then CVS and SVN and BitKeeper all
> over the place.  arch is better even since .arch-ids is hidden from
> standard lists, and never bothers greps and typical finds.

... not to mention that {arch} is only in the top-level source
directory, not in every one, like CVS.

> the only annoyance for me is the pristine trees in {arch} which screw
> up rgrep.  but ive heard tom say he wanted to kill pristine trees
> anyway, so that may well solve itself.
> > A tool like "cvs export" would probably a good thing though.

tla inventory --source foo | tar czf foo.tgz -T -

Works to a certain degree. It fails if you have empty source
directories, for one.

> i would like this, i personally don't want to ship any version control
> data with releases.  in any event its easy enough to remove this
> without an export command.

I do. I regard it as providing extra service to my (few!) users :)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]