Version control systems
dagit at codersbase.com
Sun Aug 10 02:12:30 EDT 2008
On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 10:44 PM, Roman Leshchinskiy <rl at cse.unsw.edu.au>wrote:
Maybe investing some time in fixing the most obvious darcs problems would be
> a better solution?
We're working on that over at Darcs HQ, but there is no guarantee that we'd
come close to fixing the problems within the 4-5 week window that Ian
mentioned. Supposing that the main problems GHC has with darcs 2 format get
solved in the next month, would that give GHC reason enough to keep using
darcs? It seems many of you are eager to use git; perhaps even if darcs was
working to satisfaction.
People will be working on making darcs work better with the GHC repo as a
test case either way. And personally, since I'm not a GHC dev, the decision
doesn't affect my life. Having said that, I'm still obviously biased. I'd
love for darcs to work well enough that this never came up.
Let me throw out one more idea:
What if, as a GHC contributor, I could pick equally between git and darcs?
My understanding is that, while not optimal, you could use tailor to
synchronize a darcs repository with a git one. Offer up both repositories
and keep them in sync. Let the masses decide?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users