[Arx-users] Reasons not to switch to ArX

[Kevin Smith]

At work, one of our projects is seriously considering switching to 
Subversion (from CVS). While I think svn is a worthy replacement for 
cvs, I don't see it as the ideal long-term option. This event has 
re-invigorated my interest in ArX, although I still have too many other 
vastly time-consuming projects going on right now to be able to 
contribute much to ArX.

For them, ArX is missing:

1. Full MS Windows support. They use Linux, MS Windows, and Mac, so 
running on all three is absolutely mandatory. Any idea how far away we 
are from native (not cygwin) compatibility? I might even be able to 
sponsor a small amount of development on this.

2. Some kind of GUI front end. A few users strongly dislike command-line 
tools, so a front end that allowed basic operations would probably be a 
"must have" feature (unless #3 below were available).

3. An eclipse plug-in. They could live without this, but if ArX had a 
good one, it would be a "killer feature" for many users. Especially if 
it were integrated with the refactoring tools so history would be 
preserved after a rename or move.


Are there other features ArX doesn't yet have that would inspire more 
people and projects to switch to it? After the boost license is fixed, 
is there any reason not to do a major marketing campaign among Linux users?

Kevin