On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 06:56:23PM -0400, Norman Ramsey wrote: > > * I violently agree with whomever (Don? Malcolm?) said that the > Haskell community will prosper to the degree that we have *one* > build system and *one* version-control system. And when the build > system or version-control system is standard, we gain eyeballs and > developers. I haven't found a standard build system that I am > willing to use, but I think git is good enough to be used. > > * Our long-term goal should be to get the *entire* Haskell > development community to agree on a version-control system---one > that is not darcs. We should expect this process to take several > years, and we should expect it to cost money. Would Microsoft or > Galois or York or other large players be willing to donate part of > an expert's time to migrate to the new version-control system?
It is, of course, up to people with money what they spend it on, but personally I would much prefer to see money spent on making darcs better, for reasons I won't repeat again. If it makes a difference, I would expect a research paper on how conflictors work would be easy to produce as a side-effect, as we would need to get a good description of how it works, and proofs that it does, anyway. Also, I expect we could get a BSDed darcs as a result. Thanks Ian _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
