Re: [dev] Is Mercurial (hg) suckless?

From: Uriel <>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:50:43 +0200

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Moritz Wilhelmy <> wrote:
>> Tom Lord did a fairly good job diagnosing some of the psychological
>> aspects that drove the svn insanity:
> By the way, is anyone here using tla? I used to, but being involved in some
> projects using git and hg (and svn for university, blergh, they always use
> deprecated technology for the sake of being deprecated) and never found anyone
> using arch in real development situations, which made me pretty much switch to
> git/hg since that's what many people already know and arch is rather hard to
> use compared to them.

I used both tla and its sh/awk predecessor for a while until hg and
git came out.

Some of its concepts were quite interesting, and conceptually it was
not too complex, but both implementations were severely flawed due to
Tom's really bizarre idiosyncrasies (like the ridiculous file and dir
naming convention, or the GNU-inspired coding style).

Still, it was nice to see a serious piece of software built out of
shell scripts, even if it was using the retarded GNU coreuitils.

Received on Thu Jun 10 2010 - 18:50:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Jun 10 2010 - 19:00:03 UTC