On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 11:45:28PM +0000, Jamie Webb wrote: > On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 05:27:02PM -0800, John Meacham wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 05:11:09PM +0000, Jamie Webb wrote: > > > While I agree that some sort of support for multiple projects would be > > > very useful, this implementation has already been proposed, discussed, > > > and another one chosen. No-one ever wrote the code though: > > > > Yeah, I am aware of that discussion and have followed and participated > > in other discussions on this topic on the list. however, the domains > > proposal has a few key differences: > > Well, while I disagree that the domains design is preferable to the > subrepo one, there's no denying the strength of your last argument! > I'd certainly use domains if they were available.
they are actually quite orthogonal and can coexist nicely. I feel domains play on darcs strengths well, and give us something new that other vcs's don't have. domains are actually a generally useful basic tool and can be used for more than just subrepos. but for very large subprojects, that you want to actually exist and distribute independently then the 'subrepo' model could make more sense however it is still just basic repo aggregation, not to say that isn't a very useful feature too. there is no reason they couldn't both be implemented. (at different times) John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
