Re: aside from the pangs of history, what about moving ASDF to common-lisp.net

Hi Robert,

As someone who never used subversion, I stand corrected (actually, I'm  
sitting). Now that you mention these features, I do remember that they  
are big win over CVS. I think the half-formed thought I was recalling  
was that now that good dvcs systems are here, moving from CVS to  
subversion seems like too small a step. I.e., that if one is going to  
move away from CVS, then it would be better to move to some DVCS.

> I feel crotchety in the same way GP lisper does, not so much because I
> dislike DVCS per se, but because of the babel of DVCS's.  bazaar, git,
> arch, darcs, what a pain.  It annoys me when the ratio of the number  
> of
> different DVCS's I need to know to the number of packages I actively
> modify gets too close to one.

Oh yes. I strongly agree. Sometimes it's "I want to try X but I'll be  
damned if I'm going to install another DVCS."

> On a project by project basis, I think it would be nice to achieve the
> following level of rationality:  (1) admit that the use of DVCS's come
> at a higher cost in terms of complexity (how significant the cost is
> depends on the community --- e.g., to linux kernel hackers, the cost
> would be essentially zero because it's already been paid); (2)  
> consider
> what benefit a DVCS offers in exchange for the higher complexity cost
> and (3) roughly speaking, subtract (1) from (2), and use that to  
> inform
> the decision.

Yes.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword