Re: Re: [UnixOS2] libc

On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 11:32:00AM -0500, Curtis W. Rendon wrote:
> > > We need a central source archive, anyway.
> > 
> > In my experience, a mailing list archive serves this purpose well
> > enough.  [Why I object to CVS: it creates a warm cozy filling that
> > things are settled up.  This filling is counterproductive - e.g.,
> > since it is wrong. ;-]

s/filling/feeling/g, sorry...

> A mail archive won't substitute for a code library, nor will it keep up
> with code modifications.

Do not know what you mean.  If it can't "keep up", then the whole idea
is ruined, since *all* the patches are supposed to be viewed by the
mailing list.  [And I do not know what is "a code library" in the
context of discussion of EMX updates.]

Having CVS makes a couple of operations quickier, but not much.  As
far as it is kept as a *support tool*, it is fine.  However, IMO, it
should not be considered as the primary modus operandi - this nourishes
wrong expectations and misguided priorities.

Hope this helps,
Ilya