[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: what proofs look like

From: Tom Lord <lord_at_regexps.com>
Date: 2002-08-12 17:52:11 CEST

> Now, if our model is so far off-base that we won't be able
> to support some important future feature like repeated
> merges

That's roughly one of the kinds of thing I'm worried about (one of the
big ones): the momentum that can build up behind businesses and
popular projects and the way that leads to people being pressured by
circumstance to not fix various problems until fixing them is too
costly and everyone is just stuck with them for a long time.

It's a whole bunch of issues -- repeated merges might be one place to
start looking into them.

Part of the point of the proof (in the context of this list) is not
just "we should be having really careful discussions like this", but
also "this (that one proof) is about as much as i've had time and
resources to work out in presentable format since starting arch" and I
think that's another symptom of the (vaguely defined) larger problem.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Aug 12 17:44:53 2002

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.