Gee, the perl folks said the exact opposite. I'll take your word for it
- it's your software.
SL Baur wrote:
Matthew O Persico <mpersico(a)erols.com> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org:
> But then, I'd nead a tarball to start from anyway since rematerializing
> a whole CVS tree over 56K line is probably too slow, yes?
Wrong. Tarballs are for those with bandwidth to burn. Getting and
staying up to date via CVS is *much* faster with limited bandwidth.
Matthew O. Persico