On 3/6/07, William Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all, A project I'm working on wants to switch away from CVS to SVN. I'm thinking about recommending darcs to them instead. I can make many convincing arguments for the usefulness of distributed, changset-based VC, but what I don't have a sense of is how stable and reliable darcs is. I'll be in big trouble if things go awry. :)
The conflict hanging is still the most significant issue with Darcs. Unless you are using Darcs for a single-branch, single-user project, you WILL run into this problem. From what I've read, fixing this problem requires redesigning and rewriting a lot of the core logic in Darcs. This problem has been discussed a lot but there doesn't seem to be any concrete progress being made to resolve the issue. Sometimes there are obvious problems on Windows that don't get noticed before release. Also, by design, the filename case handling is painful on Windows--for example, it is not possible to pull the GHC repository without using "--partial" on Windows due to historical changes involving files with the same name in different cases. So, be extra careful if you have Windows users. The GHC developers and others have reported problems working with repositories pulled with "--partial." I'm not sure that anybody even knows what the cause(s) of these problems are. People have to work around it by coping their changes to a repository pulled without "--partial." But, then see above. If you and your coworkers can live with the above problems, then Darcs is probably a good choice. But, Mercurial also seems like a good choice for most potential users of Darcs and it does not have the above problems. - Brian
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
