From: GP l. <fp...@cl...> - 2009-01-13 06:54:53
|
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:57:00 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Herring <dhe...@te...> > If not, then what do folks think about moving it to common-lisp.net? Sounds fine to me. Either way, I'd recommend joining the DVCS club: CVS was never fun Actually, I'm rather tired of the current "but it's better" nonsense on version control systems. I've heard a dozen names now, and most of that crap is hard to maintain and disappears quick to the next-new-kid on the block. I suppose that the illusion of having a 'real up-to-date rvcs' makes up for a lack of progress elsewhere. A old well-worn tool has little problem amongst the users of some software, it makes it easy to obtain. Some new tool that will be dead next week makes sure that software dies. If the purpose of software improvement is to increase acceptance among the userbase, then making the software easy to obtain is rather important. [1] for instance, currently Subversion is broken here, since it requires a version of Neon that breaks some important software. Great job! Neon is apparently a piece of shit that has zero backwards compatibility, and that ranks Subversion for me too. Over the past few years, it's gotten to the point that discovering some new software package has yet-another-rcvs in use usually results dropping interest. |