[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

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,

    > 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.


reply via email to

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