Eric Kow <[email protected]> writes: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 22:58:38 -0800, Simon Michael wrote: >> b. keep it as a small standalone tool (that requires libdarcs) > > As a darcs user and developer, I prefer this option :-)
+1 I particularly want to avoid feature creep in the base command list, so that users who are just starting with Darcs (and maybe have never used formal version control before) are not confronted with a swag of tangential functionality when they "darcs --help". Obviously this proposal only adds one more command... but so will the next one, and the one after that (hence "creep"). I acknowledge it's a difficult decision as to whether a feature should be "built in" or a separate utility. For example, the equivalent of "darcs send" in git requires a separate "git-email" package, which is annoying FOR ME... but maybe it isn't used enough to justify integrating it with git-core. Betram's point, that keeping a utility separate implies/allows a separate maintenance burden. Darcs used to have a git integration feature that got stale, and until it was removed people (including me) were asking "so how do I use this git integration?" because we expected it to be maintained with the rest of Darcs. I think we can also easily change our mind later; if a feature (such as fast-export) becomes very popular, we can opt to integrate it into Darcs at that time. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
