-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Jan 25, 2009, at 10:27 PM, Jared Grubb wrote: > Regardless of the outcome, those that want to use SVN can use SVN, > and those that want to use "chosen DVCS" can use that. In the end, > which is the more "lossy" repository? It seems like if the change is > transparent to everyone who is using it, then the only thing that we > care about is that the chosen backend will preserve all the > information to make it truly transparent to everyone involved. svn is the more lossy repository format. Barry -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSX5vZnEjvBPtnXfVAQJzcgP/SweUwXoECPJpO5BEkmdTLDoEfPP1X1Lg m4AALSFZ3cfRUPX3UgGmT7anY604o5oaElFR8b0HkIScJvhF56nzs9oAR0Yqi8jN zThG1rizDHh+RSqUZ0yXKHVF6ScNf8aRg/cLoVtV+J6KGpYtTCSGTQWGnvSQxCj9 I+BY75DHOI8= =9A3a -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4