kowey

5 ms·

1.
by kowey 14y ago
I'll just add that these days, people should consider using the Darcs bridge instead: http://wiki.darcs.net/DarcsBridgeUsage It's not ready for bi-directional incremental bridging, but for one shot conversions, it should be just fine. The
2.
by kowey 14y ago
It still does. We've made a lot of progress. You'll see people saying that their performance problems have gone away. But we have a long way to go. Two things to fix: downloading repos is slow (latency, too many small files); and conflict
3.
by kowey 14y ago
We're giving local branches a good think http://wiki.darcs.net/Ideas/Branches I suspect there was less pressure for local branching because a lot of things you tend to want to do with branching, Darcs sort of trivially does with its easy
4.
by kowey 14y ago
Hi, I'm very sorry about your bad experience with Darcs, and am happy that Git is working out for you. I very much admire the Git infrastructure and hope that someday Darcs can catch up or even slowly worm its way into Git again. We tend
5.
by kowey 14y ago
I look forward to Darcs being more and more worthy for Git to steal ideas from. I've spoken with an occasional Git hacker, doing a bit of minor evangelism. Hopefully we'll see more work in that direction. It's about developing and sharin
6.
by kowey 14y ago
Hi all! As a Darcs developer (mostly cheerleader), I'd like to make a general comment that Darcs should be seen more as a version control system we're trying to build than one you should use right away. Please keep an eye on it if you're i
7.
by kowey 14y ago
Hi! I'm sorry this isn't any easier yet. In Darcs, one approximation of this sort of thing is to take the whole history (sequence of patches) and hash that. Unfortunately, this approach fails to recognise different darcs-allowed patch orde