Re: [Gnu-arch-users] which archive format?

[John Arbash Meinel]

Anand Kumria wrote:

> Hi,
>
> GNU Arch seems to have a number of archive formats.
>
> tla and baz have one
> aegis has another
> likewise arx
>
> The two closest cousins (tla, baz) both understand the same format (tla
> format) however baz has some improvements which can help with both
> portability to other platforms (Windows in particular) as well as
> performing things like 'annotate'.
>
> Are these improvement likely to be incorporated into tla?  I'm very
> reluctant to create archives in (for want of another name) 'baz format' --
> I'd much rather use a format that multiple tools understood and can use.
>
> Right now that is 'tla format'; what is its future? [1]
>
> Thanks,
> Anand
>
> [1]: Will some of the modifications the aegis / ArX crew have done also be
> incorporated? Arx, from what I read, uses c--b,v for example.  Which
> allows "null" branches.
I think tla is planning on incorporating baz's tree layout at some point
in the future. There was an initial attempt, but there is going to be at
least one more go around before it happens.
So yes, for now, tla format is the compatible one. But probably soon baz
format will also be supported.
For the ArX crew, I haven't really seen what they've done, but tla
already supports "null" branches. c--v is just as valid as c--b--v.

The ArX crew don't seem to post anything on this mailing list, so I
don't know what their plans are, and how they fit together.

John
=:->

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature