[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: openbkweb-0.0
On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 09:03:24PM +0000, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
> Andrea Arcangeli <> writes:
> >I'm been told of several giga archives with dozen thousand revisions
> >under subversion for istance (I know Al Viro blamed subversion code but
> >if the design it's good it may be a good start). subversion may not
> I'm still missing a single good argument for the current SVN being
> "bad code" aside from Al Viros' lovecraftian comparisation which seem
> to be universal accepted (I got some mails citing or even using this
> comparisation to prove that SVN is "inferior"). The Apache Foundation
> e.g. is planning to move most of its projects to SVN from CVS in the
> near future. And all of these people on infrastructure@ can't be that
> clueless...

The fact a product can work great doesn't mean the code have to be nice.
Certainly if a product works great likely it's well designed in terms of
highlevel algorithms though.

Anyways I really can't comment on the sourcecode of SVN, I've the tar.gz
of r4503 here but I didn't manage looking at it yet.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.196 / U:0.136 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site