On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 03:38:12PM +0000, Eric Kow wrote: > Hi Vikraman, > > (I'm afraid I don't have feedback for you specifically, but just > general musing on GSoC) >
Hi Eric, Thanks anyway for taking the time to go through my proposal. > Exploratory proposals like this are cool in that they explicitly put > Darcs in the interesting-research realm of version control (aside from > being a usable system with a friendly UI). We have some experience > doing exploratory projects (Petr's primitive patches 3 work) > > From a practical standpoint, I'd be a bit nervous about whether or not > we could deliver an actually usable issue tracker, and whether we > would want to maintain something like a darcs issues in the codebase; > on the other hand, part of me thinks that it'd be good for Darcs to > wholeheartedly embrace its Out-Thereness and dive into projects like > this. For example maybe the work on trying to fit an alternative set > of patch commutation rules would force us to discover lots more > interesting holes in patch theory (or at least force us to reorganise, > refactor, clean up the Darcs library even more). > Both Ganesh and Guillaume have expressed concerns over this as well. In my defence, I have allocated the initial part of my timeline to building a minimal, usable issue tracker, which uses files in a darcs repository instead of worrying about patch theoretic stuff. If I don't deliver this by the midterm evaluations, feel free to fail me =). However, I still intend to spend some time to work on the patch theory for the issue tracker, since I don't have anything to do this summer! -- Vikraman
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
