Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [Pika-dev] Funding Drive

[Davide Libenzi]

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, Tom Lord wrote:

>     > From: Davide Libenzi <address@hidden>
> 
>     > I'm not following Arch discussions lately due a very limited
>     > bandwidth (not network but time). But since you ask, I can tell
>     > you the reasons that stopped my two pushes for Arch inside my
>     > group (that has a mixed Linux / Windows developement hosts):
> 
>     > 1) The need to install Cygwin on Windows
> 
> Rumour has it that MS's recent "unix services" software provides an
> alternative.    And, anyway, indeed -- it doesn't fully work on cygwin
> yet although progress seems to be being made re that.
> 
> Windows has not historically been any kind of goal or priority though
> it certainly seems to be within shooting range.

Sadly, stable Windows support was/is a must for my team. I use Cygwin for 
other tasks and it is fairly stable AFAICT. But they just do not want to 
install "another thing" to have Arch working.




>     > 2) The lack of an Arch server (they mean Arch protocol)
> 
> What a peculiar objection.  Are your evaluators just crazy or did they
> miss something?   Arch doesn't require an "arch server" because it can
> use any of a number of more venerable, stable servers which happen to
> not be arch-specific.

Here same as above. What they like, is a self-contained system. A system 
that to expose a repository does not require any extra HTTP, ssh, samba, 
ftp server running on the machine. I honestly stopped trying.




- Davide