Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: CVS repository synchronization for RefTeX

[Ralf Angeli]

* David Kastrup (2007-01-07) writes:

> Ralf Angeli <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Basing the decision on such argumentation would be short-sighted.
>> What does it help to use a system where people can jump right in but
>> which imposes a lot more overhead on them in the long run?
>
> Such as?

Merging of changes between different repositories with different file
and directory layouts.  There are likely other advantages as well, but
as I've written before, I still have to look at Arch in order to make
an informed decision.

>> We should not miss the opportunity now to make our lives easier just
>> because "we've always done it like that."
>
> Could you point out where development on the scale of RefTeX would be
> seriously and continuously be hampered by using CVS?

See above.  That might not be "serious", but with CVS we'll likely
have to setup Arch repositories _in addition_ for merging purposes.

> I consider it reasonable to pick a version control system that is
> supported out of the box on the Emacs versions (and that includes
> Emacs 21.4) for which we want to provide RefTeX support.

Because RefTeX users with Emacs 21.4 will get the sources using CVS
via Emacs?  I doubt that.

-- 
Ralf