[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?

[Pau Aliagas]

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Florian Weimer wrote:

> Miles Bader wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:04:07AM +0100, Robin Farine wrote:
> > > If you do a normal 'get', it will not populate the library since 'get'
> > > does not need anything from it. Instead, try 'get --link'.
> > 
> > Ah, good point; --link isn't necessary though, if you have a greedy library,
> > it should add a library revision as soon as you need one, e.g., if you do
> > `tla changes' or something (and of course get shouldn't create a pristine 
> > dir
> > underneath {arch}).
> 
> Well, it doesn't happen.
> 
> So pristine trees aren't really dead now.  Good to know.

IMHO we should make better defaults:
-create a .arch-cache directory and make it the default 
 my-revision-library
-make it greedy + sparse by default too

And once this is in place:
-kill all pristine-trees code
 * the less code, the better
 * less security issues, less code to mantain, less commands, less 
   confusing directories, less explanations in the manual...

So, I'd definately sentence them to ostracism :)

Pau