D Programming Language source (dmd, phobos, etc.) has moved to github

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.974.1296080574.4748.digitalmars-d-announce at puremagic.com...
> On Wednesday, January 26, 2011 13:54:04 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> "Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir at thecybershadow.net> wrote in message
>> news:op.vpxphnlmtuzx1w at cybershadow.mshome.net...
>>
>> > On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 22:46:44 +0200, Nick Sabalausky <a at a.a> wrote:
>> >> Are you deliberately missing that point?
>> >
>> > I think everyone's just annoyed how you're fiercely defending an idea
>> > that has a single advantage (terseness - I consider hashes unique in
>> > practice), but a whole slew of disadvantages,
>>
>> Terseness is not at all the only advantage. As I've said before, you can
>> reason about them, compare them, and get a general idea of "where" they 
>> are
>> in the history. I don't think merging or "changing the past" conflict 
>> with
>> that. And I'm really not seeing any non-trivial disadvantages.
>>
>> > and then criticizing Git & co. for  being "horrid" because they don't 
>> > use
>> > your idea.
>>
>> What? Are you actually trying to claim that defending/promoting one's own
>> idea when another idea exists is a *bad* thing? Seriously?
>>
>> If we're going to go that absurd route, I can just make up the claim 
>> people
>> are ganging up on me for having an idea that just happens to be different
>> from Git's world-view. If Git does something one way then that *must* be
>> the best way, right? Anything else is obviously just heresy, right? Bring
>> on the stakes and torches, we're going to Salem!!
>
> LOL. I think that part of what it comes down to is that you're making a 
> big deal
> out of what other people don't consider to be a big deal at all.

Heh, fair enough :)

> Personally, I
> don't care much about the revision number. Having incrementally increasing 
> ones
> might be nice, but if you don't have them, oh well. Obviously, you feel 
> much
> more strongly about it.
>

I tend to be really bothered by "steps backwards" that I don't see as being 
necessary. Seems to be a common theme with me.