Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Feb 2003 10:54:55 +0100 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: openbkweb-0.0 |
| |
On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 09:03:24PM +0000, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote: > Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> 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.
Andrea - 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/
| |