Re: [Arx-users] ArX and simplicity

[Amine Chadly]

Heyo !

> > I would like to know how one would end up in such situation.
> 
> That discussion wasn't entirely clear to me at the time, and is less so
> now. The idea is that you have an archive on your desktop. Now you want
> to work on your laptop. You might use the "mirror" commands of ArX to
> create a working copy on the laptop, or you might use scp.
> 
> If you use "mirror", my question was whether one of the two archives
> would be considered the original and the other a mirror, or if they
> would both be considered equal mirrors of each other. I forget whether
> Walter answered that, and I still don't know the answer.

If I got it correctly from Walter's later answer (I am cheating
huh ? :-), you get all first class citizen.
Apparently it's the way people have been using BitKeeper too. 
It seems a little messy to me... As I see it, it is almost impossible to
talk about common revisions isn't it ?
People just keep on making merges with other mirrors.
To have a common revision, one has to create a new mirror from the
developer he wants to discuss with for example, to exactly know what the
guy has right ?


> Then there is the third case, where we have a small team of equals,
> working on a single project together. In our case, we are not in the
> same office, and do not have LAN or VPN connections. I could describe my
> current vision for how I would try setting this up, if you would like to
> hear it.
> 
> I think these are the kinds of scenarios and best-practices that would
> be great to document on a wiki.

You read my mind Kevin :-).
I am definitely willing to hear the way you'd try to set it up. I have
myself vague ideas, and I am sure that Walter will correct us if
something is not correct.
In any case, I think only good can come from the discussion :-)
We could try to document the three scenarios, and add it to the wiki.
I am ready to put together the skeleton of the document from our
discussions and publish that in the wiki.
So please go on and tell us how you see it...

I have been thinking of the aliases...
what about using something close to c++ namespaces aka '::'
::arx -> reference to the arx alias...
Just a thought...

Take care all !
 -amine