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.
Bye, Waldemar
