Re: [BK] upgrade will be needed

Ed Tomlinson
2005-02-17T23:28:25Z

On Thursday 17 February 2005 11:58, Sean wrote:
> On Thu, February 17, 2005 11:55 am, Chris Friesen said:
>
> > If you look at the archives, there have been a *lot* of people saying
> > very much the same thing as you. I suspect people are getting tired of
> > giving the same responses all the time.
> >
> > Here is what Linus had to say about it a while back:
> >
> > If people in the open-source SCM community wake up and notice that
> > the current open-source SCM systems aren't cutting it, that's _good_.
> > But it's absolutely NOT an excuse to use them today. Sorry. I use
> > CVS at work, and I could never use it for Linux. I took a look at
> > subversion, and it doesn't even come close to what I wanted.
> >
> > And I personally refuse to use inferior tools because of ideology. In
> > fact, I will go as far as saying that making excuses for bad tools
> > due to ideology is _stupid_, and people who do that think with their
> > gonads, not their brains.
>
> Chris,
>
> Yes, I do remember that post. But i'm not arguing from an ideological
> basis; i'm arguing on practical grounds that the price of using BK is too
> high for its supposed benefits. I've not seen anyone else make that

Huh? This ideology in my books.

> argument here on the list and it is something that Linus may not have
> given full consideration to. At least the comment that you quote gives
> no consideration to it at all.

Linus has tried other SCMs. They did not suffice. I remember the preBK
days, when you had to post a patch half a dozen time to get it merged.
Patches were being missed left right and center. This changed after BK.
We _are_ getting large benefits from BK. They may be hard to see at our
side of the keyboard - but I believe Linus when he says BK is the best
tool for him. That this probably will not be the case for ever. Think
it still is for now though.

Ed Tomlinson