On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 12:00:22 +0100 Ashley Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> GitHub is responsible for git's popularity. Git is so popular not > because it's the best, but because it has the best Web 2.0 site. I fail to see what's so cool with GitHub: a quick overview didn't reveal anything that couldn't be done with, say, Trac+Darcs. Can you elaborate on that? Anyway, I think that darcs strongly needs more motivated core developers, not just surrounding eye-candies... Clearly darcs2 still has some problems, but despite that without any doubt it *is* the best for me and for my workflow. After reading the GHC folks rant about darcs, with their comparison with git and hg, I'm still convinced that neither of them can be considered "better" (not to mention "best") tools: they are both lot simpler, less powerful and more difficult than darcs. IMHO, the biggest problem with darcs is with its underdocumented (from the technical point of view) code base, that only an handful of people understand. As already stated, I doubt Haskell is the real culprit here: the algorithms are effectively difficult to explain in any language, English to starts with. I wish David used a less succint coding style, and could spend some time to enlight and mentor new developers, but that's the way it is. just my cents, ciao, lele. -- nickname: Lele Gaifax | Quando vivrò di quello che ho pensato ieri real: Emanuele Gaifas | comincerò ad aver paura di chi mi copia. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Fortunato Depero, 1929. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
