arx-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Arx-users] The Future (long)


From: Catatonic Porpoise
Subject: Re: [Arx-users] The Future (long)
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 15:07:00 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; OpenBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050317

Kevin Smith <address@hidden> wrote:


>>> > * No extra directories: (Subversion has .svn subdirectories in every
>>> > directory, most other systems have a single special directory at the
>>> >   top, and svk has no special directories, instead keeping that
>>> >   information elsewhere)
>>> >   -
>>> >   There is still a _arx directory at the top of every project tree.
>
>>
>> The bzr folks recently debated using . or _ for this. The big advantage
>> of .arx would be that tools like grep wouldn't recurse into the arx
>> metadata.


This is a really good point -- however, I still think it's better not to
start the directory with a dot, so that it shows up in directory
listings, making it easy to see whether a tree is versioned.

As a compromise, perhaps the directory could start with an underscore,
but the files and directories inside with a dot? Then grep(1) and
friends wouldn't find anything interesting.

Changing the subject, will ArX 3.0 do anything about the library bloat
issue? The main reason I'm not using ArX right now is unwillingness to
install gnome-vfs, orbit, glib, etc. It would be nice if ArX only
depended on libraries that were fairly "light."

regards,
Graue




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]