[Haskell-cafe] poll: how can we help you contribute to darcs?
lrpalmer at gmail.com
Sun Aug 3 13:15:29 EDT 2008
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 3:45 PM, Eric Kow <eric.kow at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Haskellers,
> I would like to take an informal poll for the purposes of darcs
> recruitment. Could you please complete this sentence for me?
> "I would contribute to darcs if only..."
I haven't used darcs much, so it's possible that I'll be forced to start
contributing by my own binding hypothetical.
I would contribute to darcs if only it had support / could have support for
splitting and merging repositories. For example, I like to work in a big
repository of all my stuff ever, because most of the things I do rarely
exceed an experiment in one file. But once something does get big enough to
be interesting, I want to split it off into its own repository. But that's
just the use case: doing it the git way (go through all patches, discard
irrelevant ones, filter relevant ones, thus losing all correlation with the
original repository) is not going to inspire me; I'd like to see support for
it in the beautiful patch theory.
> The answers I am most interested in hearing go beyond "... I had more
> time". For instance, if you are contributing to other Haskell/volunteer
> projects, why are you contributing more to them, rather than darcs?
> The context:
> Lately, darcs has suffered a setback: the GHC team has decided that it
> is now time to switch to a different system, like git or Mercurial.
> This is probably a good thing for GHC and for us. By the way, good
> luck to them, and thanks for everything! (better GHC == better darcs)
> But where is darcs going? For now, we are going to have to focus on
> what we do best, providing precision merging and a consistent user
> interface for small-to-medium sized projects. I want more, though! I
> want to see darcs 2.1 come out next year, performance enhanced out the
> wazoo, and running great on Windows. And I want to see Future Darcs,
> the universal revision control system, seamlessly integrating with
> everybody else.
> We need to learn to do better so that darcs can achieve this kind of
> wild success. For example, whereas darcs suffers from the "day job"
> problem, xmonad has had to turn developers away!
> As Don mentions, this is partly thanks to their extreme accessibility
> (better self-documentation). But does anyone have more specific ideas
> about things we need to change so that you can contribute to darcs?
> How do we hit critical hacker mass?
> I have jotted down some other thoughts here regarding recruitment here:
> In the meantime, if you have been discouraged from hacking on darcs,
> we want to know why, and how we can change things!
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe