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

[Tom Lord]

    > From: "Robert Anderson" <address@hidden>

    > I'll repeat myself here:

    > I really wanted to like subversion.  But after awhile, I couldn't
    > help but conclude that it was a slower, incomplete, oft-broken
    > CVS with multiple unstable dependencies.

Don't forget the bogus design.

You risk making it sound like "if they fix a bunch of superficial
bugs, they'll be hunky-dory".  But really, there's some deep
conceptual misfires in the design.

Of course, they have capital behind them.  So they can't lose.  It
wouldn't be permitted.  As we've recently been reminded: an
intelligence failure by capital is, at most, a little "tee-hee -- how
embarassing" kind of obstacle to continuing with the underlying plan.

-t