Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: Which source distributions should we list?

[Ralf Hemmecke]

> > 3. Silver is moving from arch to Git ....
>
> There is no need to be concerned because silver is also available
> in SVN format on sourceforge.

And as I understand correctly,

Silver (or silver mirror) = Sourceforge:branches/daly

On sourceforge we have now

branches/
silver/
tags/
trunk/

In order to reduce confusion shouldn't we just remove 
sourceforge:silver? It was created by Bill as a mirror of the tla 
archive axiom--silver--1 at axiom-developer.org. Since Tim now maintains 
Silver on git, the tla archive and the sf:silver directory should go 
away. Bill, could you do this?

> > 4. About the testing branches listed for GNU Arch....

> As far as I know there was no work on those branches that did not
> get merged into Gold. Those branches are dead.

What about removing them from the AxiomSources page?

> > 5. The subversion branches I assume are all still active ....

> Build-improvements and wh-sandbox are clearly active. 
> Hersen-algebra-improvements might or might not be.

Cliff, just update AxiomSources. If I think it is not the way I like it, 
I will modify it. And if it clashes with your opinion we will certainly 
agree on something.

> > 6. Darcs and Mercurial obviously will stay.....
>
> Bill likes these tools so clearly they won't go away. 

> There is no need to agonize over the various choices. The choice
> of source code control depends on your style of working. Choose
> one, work with it. Post your diff-Naur changesets. Since this is
> a common format that works with everything we can all apply the
> changes to our own repositories.

To be honest, I don't like diff-Naur, if I have a SCM at hand. It sounds 
like washing the dishes by hand though you have a dishwasher.

Ralf