|
|
|
|
|
by luckydude
1936 days ago
|
|
I've built two commercially successful systems, NSElite that was used to develop the Solaris kernel and was productized as Avocet/CodeManager/TeamWare (don't blame me, I didn't name it), and BitKeeper which was, at one point, in use on every continent other than the Arctic. If you are running on a 5 year old Intel CPU, that was developed using BitKeeper. The comment that RCS scales for binaries couldn't be more wrong, RCS hates binaries with a passion. The fact that you didn't address any of the points I raised says you either don't understand what a weave file format is, or, you do, you recognize it is a much better format but don't want to talk about that. This part of this thread reminds of something Ron Minnich once said: "Don't worry about people stealing your ideas, you are going to have to cram them down their throats". I'll drop it, we can revisit when I write up how weaves work. I don't think any objective person would argue that a patch based system is as good, let alone better. |
|
> I've built two commercially successful systems,
This is a great achievements, congrats on that!
All I was saying in my previous comment was, these very cool achievements don't prevent you from calling all other people "idiotic", and from saying "they don't have a clue" without even looking at their designs, or even thinking that they might have had ideas different from yours.
Also, calling Git "patch-based" is quite wrong, but my point wasn't technical.