Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular

[Mirian Crzig Lennox]

address@hidden (Tom Lord) writes:
>
> An alternative solution is to try to make the names as permissible as
> possible.  To create the illusion of arbitrary names.  That makes the
> code harrier and makes future extensions more difficult.   Each time
> the set of permitted names changes, ancillary tools such as browsers
> must be updated [...]

That's the downside, of course.  The upside is that others can take
that freedom and leverage it ways that you may never have forseen.  A
lot of the elegance and simplicity of Arch itself is due to the fact
that Unix imposes very little structure on the composition of
filenames.  That wouldn't have been possible if a rigid MS-DOSish 8.3
syntax had prevailed, even though other programming tasks would
certainly have been simpler.

Mirian