Re: openbkweb-0.0

Andrea Arcangeli
2003-02-19T09:45:17Z

On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 09:03:24PM +0000, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
> Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> writes:
>
> >I'm been told of several giga archives with dozen thousand revisions
> >under subversion for istance (I know Al Viro blamed subversion code but
> >if the design it's good it may be a good start). subversion may not
>
> I'm still missing a single good argument for the current SVN being
> "bad code" aside from Al Viros' lovecraftian comparisation which seem
> to be universal accepted (I got some mails citing or even using this
> comparisation to prove that SVN is "inferior"). The Apache Foundation
> e.g. is planning to move most of its projects to SVN from CVS in the
> near future. And all of these people on infrastructure@ can't be that
> clueless...

The fact a product can work great doesn't mean the code have to be nice.
Certainly if a product works great likely it's well designed in terms of
highlevel algorithms though.

Anyways I really can't comment on the sourcecode of SVN, I've the tar.gz
of r4503 here but I didn't manage looking at it yet.

Andrea