Is there really a good reason to switch to a new version control system and what&#39;s<br>wrong with svn anyway?<br>Steve<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 9:08 AM, David Brown &lt;<a href="mailto:lisp@davidb.org">lisp@davidb.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 11:52:17AM +0100, Mark Evenson wrote:<br>
<br>
&gt; I really like Mercurial compared to git and bzr, as it was the first of<br>
&gt; this bunch whose instructions I really understood in a brief trial period.<br>
&gt; The need for git to repack archives seems to be a weird design decision<br>
&gt; (why isn&#39;t this done semi-automatically?)<br>
<br>
It is done semi-automatically...<br>
<br>
There is a lot of &quot;FUD&quot; about how git used to be. &nbsp;FUD is probably a bit<br>
too strong, but most of the complaints I see about git aren&#39;t true in<br>
recent versions.<br>
<br>
Git is definitely harder to learn, but I personally feel that it has been<br>
worth it. &nbsp;I&#39;m not sure how much it matters for something like Slime,<br>
though.<br>
<br>
David<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
slime-devel site list<br>
<a href="mailto:slime-devel@common-lisp.net">slime-devel@common-lisp.net</a><br>
<a href="http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/slime-devel" target="_blank">http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/slime-devel</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>