gale: > Eric Kow wrote: > >> * stable libdarcs > > Reinier Lamers wrote: > > I consider this one particularly important. It's 2008 and for most people, > > even many software developers, the command line is a thing of the past. I > > think many potential users expect their VCS to integrate tightly with their > > IDE and/or graphical operating system environment and that gets so much > > easier > > when we have a libdarcs. Darcs's architecture is extremely user-friendly, > > but > > I think many people won't see that because of its command line only > > interface. > > I agree with this. But libdarcs is a longer-term solution. > I think the short-term solution of TortoiseDarcs > should be even a higher priority. It can always be > retrofitted to use libdarcs later on. > > Perhaps I'm biased, though. The life or death of darcs at my > company depends on how fast TortoiseDarcs, or some other > Windows integration - not tied to either the command line or > an IDE - materializes. > > Another high priority should be darcs distributed as > a standard installation wizard EXE for Windows. > Ditto for the Mac, but that's currently a smaller market. >
Yes, the distros can take great care with unix packages, but we may need to find dedicated maintainers for producing windows .exe and installable mac images, as ghc does. -- Don _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
