Re: A reply to "Diagnosing SVN"

> From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>

> Greg Hudson wrote:

> > Some of you may have run across the "Diagnosing SVN" Tom Lord post at
> > some point. If you do a google search on "diagnosing svn", you can
> > find indications that at least a few people saw it as a nail in the
> > coffin for Subversion.

> By the way, a tree-oriented Arch protocol is in the works. 8-)

I'm not sure what you mean by a "tree-oriented protocol".

Colin Walters is working on a "smart server" which speaks the same 'ol
arch protocol that is currently mapped onto dumb-filesystem-transports
like FTP. That isn't really so much a new protocol as new server
capabilities.

> It's a shame that Arch and Subversion are often portrayed in a day vs.
> night way. Personally, I think both projects work on the same task, but
> decided to tackle the problems in the opposite order.

Taking you as speaking informally, I agree. (Formaly, I wouldn't know
(or care :-) exactly what "opposite order" means.)

-t

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Jan 31 02:34:55 2004