From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <5d375e920711201031p466b9063mf283acc54c2976e6@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:31:25 +0100 From: Uriel To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] sources/contrib In-Reply-To: <32d987d50711200757y359e7a45k26876ebe2626ea8c@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <32d987d50711200746j51c8c6b6q2fa55b3cf45d237d@mail.gmail.com> <32d987d50711200757y359e7a45k26876ebe2626ea8c@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 03245930-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Nov 20, 2007 4:57 PM, Federico Benavento wrote: > lsr, replica, for me are the same. > I don't wan't people to have to download > a big .tgz just because I edited one line > of code. Plus with the ported stuff it gets > worst, there are people that because > of lack of memory, or whatever can't > even build the libs, that's why I'm > including binaries Maybe we could fix swap instead so people could actually build stuff without crashing their kernels? > replica was already there, I don't like replica, it is too fragile and too slow, but I don't think my opinion on this matters much. (Now that we have python we could use hg... although I fail to quite see the issue with plain tarballs) uriel >the principle > still applies, you can't keeping track > of files inside tar files is not the same. > > > > On Nov 20, 2007 12:53 PM, erik quanstrom wrote: > > > or we could just leave things as they are > > > making difficult to keep track of changes. > > > > if one is without replica, one can track changes on sources > > with history and ls -ltr. > > > > this is how i keep track of changes on my systems so > > it's more consistent, if not better, than using replica. > > > > - erik > > > > > > > > -- > Federico G. Benavento >