I guess this is where David's words about darcs having to target the small-to-medium-sized project niche ring true. Hopefully the GHC team will have a better experience with git/hg (*)!
Following the bugtracker, I think we can sum up the GHC experience with: [a1] conflicts problems, which could be fixed by switching to darcs 2, except for [b] [a2] various warts which could be fixed by switching to darcs2, except for [b] [b] on a practical front, darcs2 is slower than darcs1 on some stuff. It deals *much* better with conflicts (much reduced risk of exponential blowup), but day-to-day things are slow enough to be annoying [c] various warts not yet fixed, even in darcs2 Hopefully darcs can attract enough developers to work on the day-to-day performance issue [b] so that we at least catch up with darcs 1. We certainly do not want largeish projects to be forced to use darcs 1 :-( (*) And hopefully, darcs has done some things well enough that it will be missed, and there will be a future "let's switch back to darcs now that it's worked out its issues" -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9 _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
