Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Why we might use subversion instead of arch.

[Miles Bader]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2004 at 06:04:20PM -0300, Fabio Ferrari wrote:
> >>  Fundamentally, I think that arch should store HEAD, with reverse 
> >>patches, rather then START with forward patches.
> >Unnecessary. You can layer this over the top quite easily, by having a
> >commit hook that cacherevs the latest revision and uncacherevs the
> >prior one.
> 
> That's a nice behavior that maybe could be default in tla. That way, if 
> a explicit cache request is done, the cache is not removed.

No, it shouldn't be the default -- given tla's current algorithms, and the
lack of a smart server, that would be quite painful for many people, whereas
the current behavior is actually pretty good.

[Consider: you're on a dialup -- if tla did the above, then for _every
commit_, it would end up transferring the entire source tree!  Emacs' source
tree is 20MB in .tar.gz form...]

-Miles
-- 
Yo mama's so fat when she gets on an elevator it HAS to go down.