On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:41 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com wrote:
And if the devels decide to switch from cvs to svn the TUs would have to alter their tools anyway, regardless of any proposal. There are goals behind this first step.
This is 100% incorrect. We *did* switch to SVN a long time ago and left community in the dust. Community is still (sadly) CVS-based. No one cares about the community tools. That's the big thing here. Everyone just wants to use it. I know *I'm* not going to go out of my way to fix community issues when I don't even use community on a regular basis. If community tracked the official tools, you would get the benefit of work that is done by people who care about the tools.
I always thought that Arch users used Arch because they cared about things from a technical point of view. Why did this become a political issue? Can you explain what you see going wrong here? Like, let's assume we go through with the proposal. Things are "decoupled" and all that fun stuff. What do you lose? What do users lose?