Here's what I'm interested in for OpenACS:
- Making it easier for developers to work on their own tree of OpenACS and a) still be able to synchronize with the main tree, b) allow the OCT to grab their changes.
- No more merging nightmares and branch confusion.
- Keeping track of files regardless of naming in different trees.
arch gives us all of those. From my research, it'll make our lives much easier, and will greatly benefit those using OpenACS and wanting to have their own separate tree (i.e. a customized installation) while still being able to sync with the main tree.
Now I'm sure BitK33per would give us all of those and perhaps more. Their (Tcl/Tk-based!) graphical tools for one, are very impressive. Linus can afford to mandate a proprietary product that he helped design. Perhaps we could do that as well, but I'd rather not dwelve into that possibility.
We could use BitK33per, but that would mean that no one working on OpenACS would be able to contribute to other SCMs.
And honestly, I think arch will solve our problems just fine.