lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Apr]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]   [less markup]   [headers]   [forward]  
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Why not GNU Arch instead of BitKeeper?
FromMiles Bader <>
DateWed, 13 Apr 2005 15:36:35 +0900
Asfand Yar Qazi <ay0305@qazi.f2s.com> writes:
> I'm surprised nobody considered GNU Arch 
> (http://www.gnu.org/software/gnu-arch/) to replace BitKeeper - it was 
> probably started in direct response to the Linux Kernel using a 
> non-free tool.
>
> I must say I haven't used it, but from reviews and comparisons I've 
> read, it seems to be a good tool.

I agree (I use it) -- but of course it has its own issues.  For instance
it has a _lot_ less attention payed to optimization than one might wish
(judging from "git", this is very important to Linus :-).  The concept
of "archives" and their associated namespace offer some nice advantages,
but is a very different model than BK uses, and I presume sticking with
the familiar and simple BK model was attractive.

-Miles
-- 
Suburbia: where they tear out the trees and then name streets after them.
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-04-13 06:40    [from the cache]
©2003-2008