Sven Panne wrote: > [ Slowly redirecting to the cvs-fptools list... ] > > Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: > > On 20050501T202815+0200, Sven Panne wrote: > > > >>So my question in a nutshell: Why shall we move away from the mainstream > >>when the rest of the world (or most of) is quite happy with CVS or is > >>moving to subversion? [..] > Don't get me wrong: I am quite aware of the limitations of CVS and I would > *never* start a fresh project with CVS. But Subversion is a very worthy > successor and being "the oldest" as you mentioned is a definite plus in the > mission-critical area of version management systems. > > I don't want to start a version management jihad, I just want to understand > and discuss the reasons for the plan mentioned by SimonM to move fptools to > darcs. For our concrete project: In which respects (i.e. use cases) is darcs > better than Subversion?
Maybe I am off the track here, but isn't the right question: Is Darcs sufficient for fptools? If it is, the one reason to adopt it is because it is written in Haskell, and we like to promote Haskell. Manuel _______________________________________________ Cvs-fptools mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-fptools
