[openbeos] Re: Organizational question

Waldemar Kornewald <Waldemar.Kornewald@xxxxxx>:
>
> Axel Dörfler wrote:
> >>Arch isn't very complicated to use, it's crude. That might seem
> >>identical, but it isn't. It is true that the comments for arch seem
> >>difficult, or to explicit. However, all commands are consistent and
> >>understandable. As soon as you get into the workflow, you will know
> >>the proper commands for everyday use, and it will be easy enough to
> >>collect other information from the reference for more specialised
> >>tasks.
> > 
> > 
> > I read a short introduction to arch as well, and I think it's way 
> > to 
> > complicated to create a patch and to submit it. IMO let's rather 
> > wait 
> > for a later version or branch of it before thinking to adopt it; 
> > it's a 
> > bit too simple in what it does now.
> 
> Yes, let's branch and create something similar to 'darcs', but with 
> better tagging and branching support (or tell the arch team to look 
> at 
> darcs and make arch easier to use).
> 
... or we use Perforce. ;)

All evidence points in the general direction of low-maintanance and 
ease-of-use.

--
Mikael Jansson
http://mikael.jansson.be

Other related posts: