The basis of SVN is a relational database (BerkleyDB) either set of binary files (FS_FS).
As a matter of fact, you can use any db you like if you have experience with databases and SVN. This doesn't really speak to the weakness that you are trying to describe. Transparency of data storage. This is only accurate insofar as you would say that the average SVN user thinks there is no transparency in data storage of CVS. A lack of understanding often causes a user to claim something that isn't true. The entire history of SVN commit diffs is accessible through svndump. However, this has a LEGITIMATE weakness. svn move is a problem as svn can no longer reliably import dumps that have had an svn move executed (any # of times) in the history. Some of SVN's binaries are simply immature and do not work together seamlessly. For a substitute to svndump, see svnsync.
That is, both tag creation and branch creation are substituted for copying within the repository. From the SVN developers' viewpoint, this is very elegant decision, which simplifies one's life. However, we think that there is nothing to be proud of.
See *
However, we suppose you will not deny that it is not very convenient to store a four- digit number instead of a symbolic tag.
How many digits are your tags? 5.10? This is not an argument. See *
*A number of assertions that are just opinion based on SVN isn't like CVS.
Other people have problems with CVS that aren't in that list like --CVS lacks directory versioning. It keeps track of only files, not directories. --CVS has weak support for the copy, rename, and delete operations on files, a result of the lack of directory versioning. (similar to svn!) --CVS lacks atomic commits
From your years of "CVS" experience, you might have run into these (I did when I used CVS)
SVN is more complicated than CVS, and less functional (depending on how you view things).
In what world is it more complicated? It's less functional (from both a tool maturity and as a side effect of being LESS complicated), but I still dont understand your first "claim".
I used to use a PC as a router. Anything with 2 network interfaces will do. One connected to the "internet" or greater network, 1 for the internal network.
Configure Linux: Set up your OS security (port blocking, disable remote accounts, etc).
Configure IP Tables (was IP Chains): Set up your network security (some overlap with the above). This is also where you do your intranet packet forwarding (xlating 10.1.1.1 to a real ip on a specific port)
Configure/sbin/route Set up your routing table (if necessary).
Optional configuration: Set up your network monitoring (both sides), maybe a traffic shaper to make sure those downloaders dont cripple your connection
After awhile I realized I didn't want a big box sitting in the corner getting dust and occasionally having a hardware failure (7 years of using a box for routing!) and switched to the ever-popular WL500g and havent had a problem for 2 years (DHCP leasing keeps the undesireable wardrivers from connecting through it)
There is no formal definition of the noun "Free Software" although there is a "Free Software Foundation". The OP, like many others, like to think they can formally declare what "Free Software" is (or borrow from another source like FSF). It's inaccurate as the term holds no definition outside of it's colloquial meaning. Software that has no cost or alternately liberated software (yay english, freed software vs free software is a matter of usage). My philosophy is substantially different from the "Free Software Movement", so I posted an objection.
That was the kind of thing I thought was really interesting, the self-sustainability of each race.
It just amplified the number of "nerf this!" "buff this!" complaints by 6x as classes compare themselves to analogues in other races. How is that interesting?
The difference is that each race is a different independent faction in Warhammer.
There's Destruction and Order. There are no other "Factions" other than rep factions. More importantly, there are differences between the class categorizations that are significant. The DE "healer" is more like a Monk. Part melee. Nobody is going to have a bunch of Monks as their (primary) healers in PvE. If you have any PvE experience, you'll recognize that the best Warbands will have a mix of races.
Dwarf,Undead,Orc,Human,Gnome,Dranei,Blood Elf,Troll in WoW. So what? Factions aren't a single race so it's not all that important which races have which classes.
Once management starts treating all programmers as interchangeable is the day that all things start going to hell. Programmers are not interchangeable, and all languages are not interchangeable.
The day that management treats all programmers as interchangeable is the day you get guaranteed on-the-job training AND get paid for it. Are you nuts? At my work, they don't care what your specialty is, they care if you are a problem solver, smart, dedicated, and enjoy programming. This leads to a GREAT work environment. I dont think you understand what the base assumption is. There is NO shop that operates on purely 1 language (how do your cron jobs work if you decided to only use javascript? do you have to write your own os too?), so this is an obvious oversimplification. However, if the choice in a development language for a give project is always assumed, how is that anything but a time saver and money saver (in terms of searching for talent)?
Many ppl mistakenly assume the FBI deals with computer fraud, electronic credit card theft, etc. It is actually under the Secret Service who have VERY good people working for them.//have had to call them
i.e. you got it backwards. it's 2 steps forwards no steps back.
If the US government was mandating NON science in classrooms, this law would be heralded as progressive and moreover, PRO-SCIENCE. Yes it can be abused (as many laws are and it will be in some cases). The assumption that scientific material on nearly any subject is both widely available and beyond reproach, in classification, is a relatively new occurrence and not an altogether permanent situation. Being able to question your source material in a classroom, openly, is SUPER important to teachers with students who both have access to a wealth of realtime information that may prove "approved" curriculum, false. As it is now, in the US, this situation leads to ridiculous instances of "old school thought" being taught as the only "school of thought". Again, it's ironic that this will be used to do the reverse but not invalidating the importance of the law.
It's a matter of perspective. Most people don't actually think about what they believe, as I expect you don't.
The question is why do you think that someone should retain the sole rights to an image (which is simply an expression of an idea), and therefore to an idea? While I would agree they should have the rights to the work in their mind and in progress (to allow them the freedom to solely develop it), the claims of plagiarism are really an interpretation of a trade dispute, not relevant to morality. Is it plagiarism to write out the bits that describe the Oblivion environment? Is it plagiarism to speak the bits that describe the Oblivion environment? Is it plagiarism to convert the bits to A's and B's and to communicate the Lost environment via sign language? Why do you make a distinction? Do you know how a video card works and that they had to code those environments the same as anyone else would?
I wonder how you come to your perspective or if you've given it any critical thought.
It's a uniquely totalitarian idea that thoughts are something that you should restrict via popular regulation, it masquerades successfully in western countries as a fundamental capitalistic concept (there are many parallels I find). While it's practically useful to apply standards and practices to scientific publications in this manner, restricting forms of entertainment is subjective and unevenly applicable at best. It's interesting to note that the American interpretation of plagiarism is on Wikipedia and most people will simply believe it to be "the definition". In the long term, a distinction between what is and is not "original" does not further the arts nor is it used as anything other than a method by which to stifle competition within a domain. YMMV
It's not Google, per se, but the Internet in general (Wikipedia? AltaVista was the old-guard Google for complete and obscure results) that causes people to place less value on recalling information. As with any generalist society, you have more and more information you want to retain to act in an efficient and sane matter, making it seem people are dumb because you know a specialized bit of information but others don't, only because you think the specialized bit of information is more important that the specialized knowledge they have chosen to retain.
Not totally unexpected. Where did you get that from? And what was the point anyways, that they let Gabe do all the art and much of the dialog because we should expect PA to be weak in one area and not the other like usual? Oh wait, that's probably not THE point, 'cause that would make sense. I suspect, you missed the point.
Slashdot Mirror
To borrow from a concurrent thread, your comparison*
http://www.pushok.com/soft_svn_vscvs.php
As a matter of fact, you can use any db you like if you have experience with databases and SVN. This doesn't really speak to the weakness that you are trying to describe. Transparency of data storage. This is only accurate insofar as you would say that the average SVN user thinks there is no transparency in data storage of CVS. A lack of understanding often causes a user to claim something that isn't true. The entire history of SVN commit diffs is accessible through svndump. However, this has a LEGITIMATE weakness. svn move is a problem as svn can no longer reliably import dumps that have had an svn move executed (any # of times) in the history. Some of SVN's binaries are simply immature and do not work together seamlessly. For a substitute to svndump, see svnsync.
See *
How many digits are your tags? 5.10? This is not an argument. See *
*A number of assertions that are just opinion based on SVN isn't like CVS.
Other people have problems with CVS that aren't in that list like
--CVS lacks directory versioning. It keeps track of only files, not directories.
--CVS has weak support for the copy, rename, and delete operations on files, a result of the lack of directory versioning. (similar to svn!)
--CVS lacks atomic commits
From your years of "CVS" experience, you might have run into these (I did when I used CVS)
In what world is it more complicated? It's less functional (from both a tool maturity and as a side effect of being LESS complicated), but I still dont understand your first "claim".
I'm not a baby, I'm a tumor.
I used to use a PC as a router. Anything with 2 network interfaces will do. One connected to the "internet" or greater network, 1 for the internal network.
Configure Linux:
Set up your OS security (port blocking, disable remote accounts, etc).
Configure IP Tables (was IP Chains):
Set up your network security (some overlap with the above). This is also where you do your intranet packet forwarding (xlating 10.1.1.1 to a real ip on a specific port)
Configure /sbin/route
Set up your routing table (if necessary).
Optional configuration:
Set up your network monitoring (both sides), maybe a traffic shaper to make sure those downloaders dont cripple your connection
After awhile I realized I didn't want a big box sitting in the corner getting dust and occasionally having a hardware failure (7 years of using a box for routing!) and switched to the ever-popular WL500g and havent had a problem for 2 years (DHCP leasing keeps the undesireable wardrivers from connecting through it)
There is no formal definition of the noun "Free Software" although there is a "Free Software Foundation". The OP, like many others, like to think they can formally declare what "Free Software" is (or borrow from another source like FSF). It's inaccurate as the term holds no definition outside of it's colloquial meaning. Software that has no cost or alternately liberated software (yay english, freed software vs free software is a matter of usage). My philosophy is substantially different from the "Free Software Movement", so I posted an objection.
Not to me it's not. It's philosophical. /distinction
It just amplified the number of "nerf this!" "buff this!" complaints by 6x as classes compare themselves to analogues in other races. How is that interesting?
My primary was a Gnome. I lived without it.
There's Destruction and Order. There are no other "Factions" other than rep factions. More importantly, there are differences between the class categorizations that are significant. The DE "healer" is more like a Monk. Part melee. Nobody is going to have a bunch of Monks as their (primary) healers in PvE. If you have any PvE experience, you'll recognize that the best Warbands will have a mix of races.
See:
http://www.warhammerinfo.com/ or any other of a number of sites.
Night Elves and Tauren are the only races that CAN be druids.
Dwarf,Undead,Orc,Human,Gnome,Dranei,Blood Elf,Troll in WoW. So what? Factions aren't a single race so it's not all that important which races have which classes.
The day that management treats all programmers as interchangeable is the day you get guaranteed on-the-job training AND get paid for it. Are you nuts? At my work, they don't care what your specialty is, they care if you are a problem solver, smart, dedicated, and enjoy programming. This leads to a GREAT work environment. I dont think you understand what the base assumption is. There is NO shop that operates on purely 1 language (how do your cron jobs work if you decided to only use javascript? do you have to write your own os too?), so this is an obvious oversimplification. However, if the choice in a development language for a give project is always assumed, how is that anything but a time saver and money saver (in terms of searching for talent)?
http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html
The Secret Service will be the ones the call you and send an agent.
As I said, this is from experience.
Many ppl mistakenly assume the FBI deals with computer fraud, electronic credit card theft, etc. It is actually under the Secret Service who have VERY good people working for them. //have had to call them
This is a Good Thing(tm).
i.e. you got it backwards. it's 2 steps forwards no steps back.
If the US government was mandating NON science in classrooms, this law would be heralded as progressive and moreover, PRO-SCIENCE. Yes it can be abused (as many laws are and it will be in some cases). The assumption that scientific material on nearly any subject is both widely available and beyond reproach, in classification, is a relatively new occurrence and not an altogether permanent situation. Being able to question your source material in a classroom, openly, is SUPER important to teachers with students who both have access to a wealth of realtime information that may prove "approved" curriculum, false. As it is now, in the US, this situation leads to ridiculous instances of "old school thought" being taught as the only "school of thought". Again, it's ironic that this will be used to do the reverse but not invalidating the importance of the law.
I agree with you on grounds other than anti-corporation (as that is not solid ground).
I agree that there is fraud. However, fraud in entertainment is not damaging, and therefore, not morally wrong. See: Noble Lie. YBMV
It's a matter of perspective. Most people don't actually think about what they believe, as I expect you don't.
The question is why do you think that someone should retain the sole rights to an image (which is simply an expression of an idea), and therefore to an idea? While I would agree they should have the rights to the work in their mind and in progress (to allow them the freedom to solely develop it), the claims of plagiarism are really an interpretation of a trade dispute, not relevant to morality. Is it plagiarism to write out the bits that describe the Oblivion environment? Is it plagiarism to speak the bits that describe the Oblivion environment? Is it plagiarism to convert the bits to A's and B's and to communicate the Lost environment via sign language? Why do you make a distinction? Do you know how a video card works and that they had to code those environments the same as anyone else would?
I wonder how you come to your perspective or if you've given it any critical thought.
I saw them.
It's a uniquely totalitarian idea that thoughts are something that you should restrict via popular regulation, it masquerades successfully in western countries as a fundamental capitalistic concept (there are many parallels I find). While it's practically useful to apply standards and practices to scientific publications in this manner, restricting forms of entertainment is subjective and unevenly applicable at best. It's interesting to note that the American interpretation of plagiarism is on Wikipedia and most people will simply believe it to be "the definition". In the long term, a distinction between what is and is not "original" does not further the arts nor is it used as anything other than a method by which to stifle competition within a domain. YMMV
Duplicating ideas is not morally wrong. Profiting from other people's ideas is not morally wrong. Nothing was stolen.
I don't see anything morally wrong with this. Next up, news that Broken Sword is a Diablo clone. So what. //for later reference
Chuck Norris only dropped the suit because he realized it was a biography.
It's not Google, per se, but the Internet in general (Wikipedia? AltaVista was the old-guard Google for complete and obscure results) that causes people to place less value on recalling information. As with any generalist society, you have more and more information you want to retain to act in an efficient and sane matter, making it seem people are dumb because you know a specialized bit of information but others don't, only because you think the specialized bit of information is more important that the specialized knowledge they have chosen to retain.
Not totally unexpected. Where did you get that from? And what was the point anyways, that they let Gabe do all the art and much of the dialog because we should expect PA to be weak in one area and not the other like usual? Oh wait, that's probably not THE point, 'cause that would make sense. I suspect, you missed the point.