>>>>> "Stephane" == Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@xxxxxx> writes: Stephane> Why a dVCS? Any VCS would make it, and Subversion, for Stephane> instance, would be a good choice. If we use a dVCS, More efficient. Everything works better with local history. Svn wastes a lot of disk by keeping two copies of every file in each checkout. At least a dVCS can compress the store. Stephane> I vote for darcs. Doesn't darcs have a bug they can't fix? esr's recent survey of the dVCSs concluded that git, hg and bzr are the best choices. He considered performance, as well as community involvement and how many other projects are using each dVCS, on the theory that bugs get fixed faster when more people use it. -JimC (As a side note, my initial mention of rsync breaking was a misnomer. My rsync job only grabs rfcs and i-ds. I had conflated that with a request I sent some months (years?) back to make ftp.iana.org rsyncable. It is only ftp which hadn't been updated since April. And in a off-list reply IANA said they plan to fix that.) -- James Cloos <cloos@xxxxxxxxxxx> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6 _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf