> Interesting. Is your experience with darcs just with the GHC repository? > Except for the darcs1 exponential merge problem, I would be surprised if > darcs2 repositories are more than twice as slow as git for common > operations. I know git is faster and I know darcs annotate is painfully > slow; but I think that's mainly because the git algorithms have better > asymptotic complexities at the cost of user visible complexity and cognitive > load. Darcs was meant to be simple for the user. Do you feel that it's > complex because people discuss patche theory and debate about how to > rigorously define it?
theory doesn't scare me. i am using haskell after all, so i am used to reading long winded papers. > What is a simple thing you want to do that darcs is not stable for? With > the exception of windows and ghc, darcs stable releases has always been rock > solid for me, so I would like to hear examples of what you mean. So I use git at work on top of a p4 repository with maybe 10k files, binaries, etc.. Its pretty big, 1.3g total. We use p4 as the official vcs at work, but I prefer git to checkpoint and sync my work between lots of machines without actually having to be on the damned vpn. So i basically branch and merge etc.. and sometimes merge from p4 into my git repo and propagate those changes out through pushes to all my other machines. So by a simple vcs, i mean something that can just branch and merge, and do it fast without ever corrupting my history. I could care less about cherry picking, checksum consistency, etc.. and all the other stuff that makes darcs special. >> Maybe if you can gut darcs into a really simple and basic vcs that is >> fast and really really stable, and allow plugins that wont compromise >> your repository then I would gladly use it and contribute in areas >> where i can improve it. > > I thought darcs was already a really simple and basic vcs that is really > realy stable...So you're just asking for faster and a plugin system, right? > :-) (Obviously you don't agree, and I like to tease, but that's fine your > feedback is what we want so we can improve.) I tried to use darcs maybe 1.5 years ago, and I found that darcs is not to happy about getting killed mid operation, and will sometimes get completely screwed up or deadlocked after merges. > What would plugins do? Each darcs command has a mechanism for automatically > running a script before or after the command. Or maybe you have no > complaint about the current flexibility and want a more secure way to run > the scripts? by plugins i just mean keep the core simple and stable and fast, and stick all the other stuff somewhere else in a way that wont break and slow down the core functions. I dont care if they are actually dynamically loaded plugins or things you turn on and off durring compilation, or just not use at all if you don't want them, BUT, i would like those things not to screw up my repo if i do end up trying them. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
