Re: Why not an arch mirror for the kernel?

From: Henning P. Schmiedehausen (hps@intermeta.de)
Date: Thu Mar 07 2002 - 12:12:12 EST

Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> writes:

>And why Arch and not subversion? Subversion has more people working on
>it, Collab has put a pile of money into it, it has the Apache guy working
>on it, and Arch has one guy with no money and a pile of shell scripts.
>Come on. There is nothing free in this life, if one guy and some hacking
>could solve this problem, it would have been solved long ago.

One of the most important reasons why packages like CVS, RCS (and SCCS
and I do intend the pun. ;-) ) don't die is C-x C-q and the vc package.

The fact that bk is SCCS compatible here is IMHO one of the really big
positive points.

        Regards
                Henning 

-- 
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen       -- Geschaeftsfuehrer
INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH     hps@intermeta.de

Am Schwabachgrund 22  Fon.: 09131 / 50654-0   info@intermeta.de
D-91054 Buckenhof     Fax.: 09131 / 50654-20   
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 07 2002 - 21:01:05 EST