"Stephen J. Turnbull" <[email protected]> writes: > Darcs's commands *are* well-designed. It's also true that for > small-ish projects [Darcs' simplifications are a killer feature]. But > please, let's not make claims that go overboard. Darcs *is* missing a > lot of functionality that is essential for some tasks and in some > organizations; it is not a fully functional replacement for git, > Mercurial, or even Bazaar.
+1. As Eric says, we should strive for complete honesty in our sales pitch. I'm even in favour of saying "we recommend Darcs for small projects, but not big ones", as long as we can be clear on exactly what we mean by "small". > Especially, Darcs does not provide access to the history DAG. camp-view generates a DAG, but its of dependencies (i.e. arcs between patches that don't commute), which is about the closest you'll get to a history DAG given Darcs' simplifications. A perl script exists which can duplicate camp-view functionality (very inefficiently), and there's an open ticket to implement this using libHSDarcs: http://bugs.darcs.net/issue1261 _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
