RSpec and GEMS DSL Keyword Additions to ruby.vim?
now at bitwi.se
Wed Feb 7 13:28:36 EST 2007
On 2/7/07, Hugh Sasse <hgs at dmu.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> > On 2/7/07, Doug Kearns <dougkearns at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 08:14:11AM -0500, Rob Muhlestein wrote:
> > > > Any chance of moving project to SVN?
> > > I'm completely indifferent but you're the second person to mention it.
> > > Anyone else have any feelings either way?
> > Git.
> :-) In British English that is a term of abuse! Given the context I
> know it's not in this thread...
(Only kidding. I know about the words meaning. But I wanted to keep
my answer short and to the point without any "I think we should use
Subversion because it has such a cool name" or "I think the developers
should use Bazaar because it's written in Python and I like Python and
my opinion matters even though I don't actually develop for vim-ruby
or anything but I want to download the bleeding-edge sources every
night and masturbate all over the new change-sets and since I only
have one hand free I'm not able to install another VCS".)
> Are there any clear technical advantages of ... whatever? ISTR that SVN
> handles directorires better than CVS, and CVS handles renames better
> than RCS, but where things are in this field now I don't know. With
> them being open source I expect theres a bit of crossover and mutation
> going on.
Well, CVS is just plain bad. SVN is just plain not much better. For
this particular project, handling of renames is almost irrelevant, so
SVN doesn't offer anything relevant over CVS. Going distributed is
nice, and Git is my favorite. If there's actually going to be a
switch, I hope people take the time to look at the merits modern VCSs
offer. And let me make my point very clear: SVN is /not/ a modern
More information about the vim-ruby-devel