Re: planning 2.0?

Peter Conrad <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.version-control.arch.user
Organization [ t]ivano Software GmbH
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi,

Am Freitag, 21. April 2006 15:09 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
> Peter Conrad <[email protected]> writes:
> > You have to balance cost against usefulness. If 8.3 filenames
> > were the limit on today's windows, the usefulness of sticking
> > to the limit would probably outweigh the cost.
>
> I'd like to point out that this is clearly a political argument --- I
> can't believe that you'd honestly defend such a technical flaw.

I'm not defending it. I'm arguing as a professional user of RCSs
who has to live in a reality that happens to contain machines running
windows. Part of the job of an RCS is to enable cooperation in a
team. An RCS that doesn't run on windows cannot perform that job
(in my environment), and thereby disqualifies itself as a useful tool.

This is not a political argument, it's being pragmatic.

Bye,
	Peter
-- 
Peter Conrad                        Tel: +49 6102 / 80 99 072
[ t]ivano Software GmbH             Fax: +49 6102 / 80 99 071
Bahnhofstr. 18                      http://www.tivano.de/
63263 Neu-Isenburg

Germany
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.